# The Anti-Monitor (DC Comics) VS. Amatsu-Mikaboshi (Marvel Comics)



## Tonathan100 (Oct 4, 2016)

Both at the absolute pinnacle of their power.

Location: DC Comics Local Multiverse
Distance: 10^10^115 meters
Knowledge: 0%
Restrictions: None

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Agent9149 (Oct 4, 2016)

Chaos King.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 4, 2016)

Agent9149 said:


> Chaos King.



Most likely.  I recall the old DC Multiverse that the Anti-Monitor *took years to destroy *number only in the thousands.  Last time I checked, the Marvel Multiverse clocks in at *28,744,923,048,932* based on the highest numeral used to describe a Marvel universe.


----------



## Agent9149 (Oct 4, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Most likely.  I recall the old DC Multiverse that the Anti-Monitor *took years to destroy *number only in the thousands.  Last time I checked, the Marvel Multiverse clocks in at *28,744,923,048,932* based on the highest numeral used to describe a Marvel universe.



And the Chaos King wasn't truly defeated. Hercules basically did this:


----------



## Blocky (Oct 5, 2016)

Anti-monitor still did destroyed a infinite muitlverse tho.


----------



## Gunstarvillain (Oct 5, 2016)

They had to let chaos king win because they could do nothing to him


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

Blocky said:


> Anti-monitor still did destroyed a infinite muitlverse tho.



Not only that, but for every universe he destroyed, he took the energy from it. So he destroyed an infinite multiverse, while also collecting all of the energy from said multiverse. 

By the end of COIE, he had the power to destroy the multiverse + absorbing the energy from the multiverse. 

Multiverse^2?


----------



## Galo de Lion (Oct 5, 2016)

Chaos King absorb everything he destroyed too.

*Spoiler*: __ 








Plus the Marvel multiverse is also infinite.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 5, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Most likely.  I recall the old DC Multiverse that the Anti-Monitor *took years to destroy *number only in the thousands.  Last time I checked, the Marvel Multiverse clocks in at *28,744,923,048,932* based on the highest numeral used to describe a Marvel universe.


Prove that the Anti-Monitor took years to destroy the multiverse, which was stated to be infinite multiple times.

Reactions: Dislike 3


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

The Anti-monitor destroyed the multiverse, except one Earth. This Earth is where the heroes in COIE took a stand against the Anti-Monitor.

It's explicitly stated that the Antimonitor destroyed the entirety of the multiverse, which was infinite. Which is why it's called Crisis of Infinite Earths. Basically the Anti-matter wave consumed entire universes, which the energies went to the Antimonitor. When one Earth was left, they rose up against Antimonitor. 

So yea, we're basically dealing with multiversal vs multiversal here.

But the "took years thing" is a different story. Don't know the validity of that.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 5, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> The Anti-monitor destroyed the multiverse, except one Earth. This Earth is where the heroes in COIE took a stand against the Anti-Monitor.
> 
> It's explicitly stated that the Antimonitor destroyed the entirety of the multiverse, which was infinite. Which is why it's called Crisis of Infinite Earths. Basically the Anti-matter wave consumed entire universes, which the energies went to the Antimonitor. When one Earth was left, they rose up against Antimonitor.
> 
> So yea, we're basically dealing with multiversal vs multiversal here.






> But the "took years thing" is a different story. Don't know the validity of that.


That is an outright lie. The Anti-Monitor was consuming significant portions of the multiverse as soon as he was woken up. He never took years to accomplish his feat.


----------



## Fang (Oct 5, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> Multiverse^2?



No, because that's not how cardinality works.


----------



## BreakFlame (Oct 5, 2016)

It wouldn't be the dumbest thing comics have pulled, though.


----------



## VatInTheIcus (Oct 5, 2016)

AM fought Spectre who was amped by several mystics from Earth in which there were Classic Fate, Phantom Stranger and Thunderbolt who is a 5th Dimension being and he still lost. If anything this fight would be a stalemate and COIE Anti Monitor still has time travel.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

Fang said:


> No, because that's not how cardinality works.


It was a joke


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 5, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> The Anti-monitor destroyed the multiverse, except one Earth. This Earth is where the heroes in COIE took a stand against the Anti-Monitor.
> 
> It's explicitly stated that the Antimonitor destroyed the entirety of the multiverse, which was infinite. Which is why it's called Crisis of Infinite Earths. Basically the Anti-matter wave consumed entire universes, which the energies went to the Antimonitor. When one Earth was left, they rose up against Antimonitor.
> 
> ...



I have the volume of Crisis on Infinite Earths.  I just need to get back home from where I am right now, and I can check the information.  But I do recall that a number was given to  the Universes Anti-Monitor destroyed (around 1000).

In fact, a quick search (which actually focused on Pariah), brings up the Monitor himself giving the number:

Reactions: Friendly 1


----------



## Gunstarvillain (Oct 5, 2016)

Did antimon actually get defeated by the heroes? Because chaos king actually achieved his goal.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

Are you going by the statement "Already more than a thousand universes have perished?" Cause that doesn't mean there were ONLY 1000 universes that were destroyed

But it's explicitly stated in 52 weekly, and accounted for in Infinite Crisis and again reiterated in Darkseid War what Anti-monitor did.

First, Donna Troy (In 52 weekly) went to Harbinger's historical records and got the full details on how it went down.


*Spoiler*: __ 






  [/s




An infinite plane of different universes, with slight differences in the multiverse. All were destroyed, which is why it's a called a Crisis on *Infinite *Earths. Each universe is home to a specific Earth (New Earth, Earth Prime, etc.)


Infinite Crisis, it's stated that the multiverse was wiped out. However the heroes from the five different Earths, (such as Earth 2 Clark and the like) fought back. Everything was wiped out except 1 universe, where Anti was finally stopped.

*Spoiler*: __ 








Metron accounts that all of reality was threated when Anti was consuming universes in his anti-matter wave.

*Spoiler*: __ 









And as stated, all universes wiped out were added to his power.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

Gunstarvillain said:


> Did antimon actually get defeated by the heroes? Because chaos king actually achieved his goal.



Anti was defeated, but it was mostly comic bullshit. 

A defeat regardless.


----------



## BreakFlame (Oct 5, 2016)

@Catalyst75 Maybe that part is just saying only a thousand have died at that point. How far along the story is that particular scan?


----------



## Hardboned (Oct 5, 2016)

Aren't multiversal threads banned?


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 5, 2016)

Hardboned said:


> Aren't multiversal threads banned?


not that i recall, but we generally dont like them because its just "my infinity is bigger than yours" debates


----------



## Hardboned (Oct 5, 2016)

OneSimpleAnime said:


> not that i recall, but we generally dont like them because its just "my infinity is bigger than yours" debates


Sounds like some great Suggsverse level shit right there


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 5, 2016)

BreakFlame said:


> Maybe that part is just saying only a thousand have died at that point. How far along the story is that particular scan?



Issue #2.

It is in issue #4 where it is mentioned that, after the death of Earth-6, only five Earths remained.  Issue #3 was dedicated to the fights over the Monitor Towers situated through the time-lines.

So from there, one can conclude that the DC Multiverse numbered in just over a thousand - Earth-3 and Earth-6 were the last ones destroyed before the other remaining five were combined into one.

At least, from what I observed.

Later on, in the issue Barry Allen died, the Anti-Monitor himself mentions "a thousand Universes and more".

So I think that sets the number in the "thousands", rather than "infinite".


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

This thread is essentially infinite vs infinite though


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 5, 2016)

As I said above, dialogue in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" itself pegs the number of Universes in the DC Multiverse (Pre-Crisis) in the thousands.  On the other hand, Marvel hits the *trillions*.

It isn't "infinite" (The Beyonders still wound up destroying the whole multitude), but it at least ten orders of magnitude greater.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 5, 2016)

Id have to delve into pre-crisis mythology more but im pretty sure there are more than thousands of worlds in the multiverse.


----------



## Gunstarvillain (Oct 5, 2016)

It's actually less complicated than it seems as of now.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 5, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> As I said above, dialogue in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" itself pegs the number of Universes in the DC Multiverse (Pre-Crisis) in the thousands.  On the other hand, Marvel hits the *trillions*.



I'll go re-read COIE.

But the historical records and accounts of the events by both the people who experienced it, witnessed it and the authors of DC comics, all state infinite earths. Hell, the title written by the authors state it's the "history of the DCU" in which Harbringer explains it during the One Year after Infinite Crisis. 

@Tranquil Fury want to clarify Mr comic guru?


----------



## Crackle (Oct 6, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> As I said above, dialogue in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" itself pegs the number of Universes in the DC Multiverse (Pre-Crisis) in the thousands.  On the other hand, Marvel hits the *trillions*.
> 
> It isn't "infinite" (The Beyonders still wound up destroying the whole multitude), but it at least ten orders of magnitude greater.


Going by statements later on and on DC database there are as many universes in the bleed as there are atoms on the planet earth


----------



## Deer Lord (Oct 6, 2016)

DC's cosmology changes more often then a teenager's profile picture, of course its going to contradict itself


----------



## Fang (Oct 6, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> As I said above, dialogue in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" itself pegs the number of Universes in the DC Multiverse (Pre-Crisis) in the thousands.  On the other hand, Marvel hits the *trillions*.
> 
> It isn't "infinite" (The Beyonders still wound up destroying the whole multitude), but it at least ten orders of magnitude greater.



Marvel Multiverse has always been infinite.


----------



## Gunstarvillain (Oct 6, 2016)

So is the conscious decision to ignore fact base statement?


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 6, 2016)

Deer Lord said:


> DC's cosmology changes more often then a teenager's profile picture, of course its going to contradict itself



It went from infinite, to one, to 52, and now it's at some number.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 6, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> It went from infinite, to one, to 52, and now it's at some number.



I shall maintain the "one thousand + Universes" Multiverse size for the DCU Pre-Crisis. I checked, and it is mentioned by both Monitors exactly how many Universes were destroyed.

So, it should be back up to 1000 Universes (not counting those Hypertime shenanigans).


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Oct 7, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> I shall maintain the "one thousand + Universes" Multiverse size for the DCU Pre-Crisis. I checked, and it is mentioned by both Monitors exactly how many Universes were destroyed.
> 
> So, it should be back up to 1000 Universes (not counting those Hypertime shenanigans).



I mean tonathan says some stupid shit but this is equally as stupid senpai, there's no need to downplay something just because someone else is wanking it, or vice versa for that matter.


----------



## Galo de Lion (Oct 7, 2016)

I'm pretty sure Crisis on _Infinite_ Earths more than implies an infinite multiverse.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 7, 2016)

TTGL said:


> I'm pretty sure Crisis on _Infinite_ Earths more than implies an infinite multiverse.



Crisis on a Thousand Earths

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 7, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> I mean tonathan says some stupid shit but this is equally as stupid senpai, there's no need to downplay something just because someone else is wanking it, or vice versa for that matter.



I tend to take a set, stated number over any thrown around uses of "infinite".  

In itself, 'infinite' means "not able to be counted".  But for the Anti-Monitor to destroy all the Universe except five, and take their power for his own, there has to be a finite number of Universes.  Pariah, who witnessed the destruction of all the Universe, also gives the statement of a thousand Universes.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 8, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> I tend to take a set, stated number over any thrown around uses of "infinite".
> 
> In itself, 'infinite' means "not able to be counted".  But for the Anti-Monitor to destroy all the Universe except five, and take their power for his own, there has to be a finite number of Universes.  Pariah, who witnessed the destruction of all the Universe, also gives the statement of a thousand Universes.


Or, it could just mean that the Anti-Monitor could destroy infinite universes. And it was never shown, stated, or implied that Pariah witnessed the destruction of *every *universe.


----------



## Crackle (Oct 8, 2016)

TTGL said:


> I'm pretty sure Crisis on _Infinite_ Earths more than implies an infinite multiverse.


It doesn't matter we can't really accept infinite, omnipotent or endless statements at face value. Otherwise we'd have the Juubi on Naruto as having actually limitless power which ofcourse is dumb considering now it's just the benchamark for the top tiers.

If we take infinite earths at face value then we'd have to take Hulk has limitless strength and Galactus is omnipotent at face value too.


----------



## Blocky (Oct 8, 2016)

What's with the downplay?
Jesus, Has he really made you guys go this low?


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 8, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> And it was never shown, stated, or implied that Pariah witnessed the destruction of *every *universe.





THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF HIS CHARACTER IN "CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS" was that he involuntarily gained the ability to be drawn to moments of great disaster, which includes when the Anti-Monitor destroys a Universe.  He was doing this since after the Anti-Monitor destroyed his world, and the Monitor saved him.  The Monitor used Pariah to track where the Anti-Monitor would strike next.

So it is a safe bet that, given how Pariah was saved by Dax Novu, he has seen every event of the Anti-Monitor destroying a Universe unfold.



Blocky said:


> What's with the downplay?
> Jesus, Has he really made you guys go this low?



That would imply that I am trying to down-play something into something that there is no evidence for.

Pariah, the Monitor, and the Anti-Monitor all mentioned during "Crisis On Infinite Earths" that a thousand Universes were destroyed prior to the event itself.  

*So we have three cases of the three characters who all observed the destruction of the Universe (either directly, by proxy, or by being the cause) giving the same stated number to the number of Universes destroyed.*


----------



## TheManWhoLaughs (Oct 9, 2016)

The amount of Marvel wank and DC downplaying is annoying . Chaos king didn't consume the Multiverse and hercules at the end of the series only restored a single universe .

Chaos king is only universal at best

And yes AM destroyed infinite universes to five . It been said multiple times in several comics


----------



## Crackle (Oct 9, 2016)

TheManWhoLaughs said:


> The amount of Marvel wank and DC downplaying is annoying . Chaos king didn't consume the Multiverse and hercules at the end of the series only restored a single universe .
> 
> Chaos king is only universal at best
> 
> And yes AM destroyed infinite universes to five . It been said multiple times in several comics


Because Infinite has become a very general term. Word of mouth means nothing even from credible sources again using Hulk from marvel, Juubi from Naruto and as references. This applies to all fictions that don't back up this claim it's not exclusive to just DC.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 9, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF HIS CHARACTER IN "CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS" was that he involuntarily gained the ability to be drawn to moments of great disaster, which includes when the Anti-Monitor destroys a Universe.  *He was doing this since after the Anti-Monitor destroyed his world, and the Monitor saved him.  The Monitor used Pariah to track where the Anti-Monitor would strike next.*
> 
> So it is a safe bet that, given how Pariah was saved by Dax Novu, he has seen every event of the Anti-Monitor destroying a Universe unfold.


Which doesn't mean anything, since by that time multiple universes would have been destroyed.




> That would imply that I am trying to down-play something into something that there is no evidence for.
> 
> Pariah, the Monitor, and the Anti-Monitor all mentioned during "Crisis On Infinite Earths" that a thousand Universes were destroyed prior to the event itself.
> 
> *So we have three cases of the three characters who all observed the destruction of the Universe (either directly, by proxy, or by being the cause) giving the same stated number to the number of Universes destroyed.*


They all said "*more* than a thousand". So they did not give a definite limit to the amount of universes destroyed.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Deer Lord (Oct 9, 2016)

Why would you describe "Infinite" as "more than a thousand"
that's a dumb argument and you know it


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 9, 2016)

Deer Lord said:


> Why would you describe "Infinite" as "more than a thousand"
> that's a dumb argument and you know it


You would have a case otherwise, but it was clearly stated multiple times in multiple different comics that an infinite number of universes existed in the Pre-Crisis DC Comics multiverse. To say otherwise is obtuse downplaying.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 9, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Which doesn't mean anything, since by that time multiple universes would have been destroyed.



No, it means something, *because Monitor woke up the same instant the Anti-Monitor did.  
*
Pariah's world *was the very first one destroyed by Anti-Monitor.  *The one the Anti-Monitor took energy from in order to break free from his prison in the first place.  

You really haven't read "Crisis On Infinite Earths" at all, have you, if you assume that "by that time multiple universes would have been destroyed" when Pariah began to be used by the Monitor to monitor the Anti-Monitor's progress - *PARIAH'S UNIVERSE WAS THE FIRST TO DIE.*


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 9, 2016)

Tonathan doesn't read the comics, he just picks up the scans from respect threads on Reddit and then says he read them.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## Fang (Oct 9, 2016)

Yep, its painfully obvious that's what he does.


----------



## Toaa (Oct 9, 2016)

Tonathan pls stahp


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 9, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> No, it means something, *because Monitor woke up the same instant the Anti-Monitor did.
> *
> Pariah's world *was the very first one destroyed by Anti-Monitor.  *The one the Anti-Monitor took energy from in order to break free from his prison in the first place.
> 
> You really haven't read "Crisis On Infinite Earths" at all, have you, if you assume that "by that time multiple universes would have been destroyed" when Pariah began to be used by the Monitor to monitor the Anti-Monitor's progress - *PARIAH'S UNIVERSE WAS THE FIRST TO DIE.*


You do realize that I actually did read Crisis On Infinite Earths enough to make this blog, right?:



And by the way, your point is complete bullshit.



By the time the Monitor Dax Novu woke up, Pariah was already simply floating in a "netherversal" chamber.



And by the time that Monitor Dax Novu gave Pariah his tracking power, universe after universe was already being destroyed.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 9, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> By the time the Monitor Dax Novu woke up, Pariah was already simply floating in a "netherversal" chamber.



Both broke out of their prisons at the same time.  You are trying to make it sound like that only one of them was awake at the time.



Tonathan100 said:


> And by the time that Monitor Dax Novu gave Pariah his tracking power, universe after universe was already being destroyed.



And how exactly did you come to that conclusion from the panels you linked?  The dialogue was thus:

"The Monitor created a ship in which he could travel.  No longer would he be rooted to the Moon of Oa.  Somehow you could sense where evil was to tread, and the Monitor could follow you to where his brother would strike next.  *But as the Anti-Monitor destroyed Universe after Universe, expanding his power, the Monitor became weaker with each loss."
*
Nothing in the dialogue suggests that the Anti-Monitor was already destroying Universes before the Monitor used Pariah to monitor the Anti-Monitor's actions.

So my point, unlike what you are trying to claim is not "complete bullshit".


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 10, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Both broke out of their prisons at the same time.  *You are trying to make it sound like that only one of them was awake at the time.*


Because that is actually the case. If both broke out of their respective moons at the same time, then Dax Novu would have observed Mobius transmuting the energy of the destroyed universe to form his Antimatter Wave.




> And how exactly did you come to that conclusion from the panels you linked?  The dialogue was thus:
> 
> "The Monitor created a ship in which he could travel.  No longer would he be rooted to the Moon of Oa.  Somehow you could sense where evil was to tread, and the Monitor could follow you to where his brother would strike next.  *But as the Anti-Monitor destroyed Universe after Universe, expanding his power, the Monitor became weaker with each loss."
> *
> ...


See above.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 10, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Because that is actually the case. If both broke out of their respective moons at the same time, then Dax Novu would have observed Mobius transmuting the energy of the destroyed universe to form his Antimatter Wave.



And I find myself doubting you actually bothered to read the story even more.  *Lyla was very clear when she said that the Montior was freed at the same time as the Anti-Monitor*.  Don't go dismissing that out of hand just because it does not fit with what you are trying to argue.  All you are doing right now is trying to forcibly imposing your version of events in the comics to suit your purposes.

In other words, the same kind of thing that happened with Lionel Suggs in the GetBackers deception.  But in your case, your "Get Backers" is Superman (primarily), and any other DC or Marvel character you can get your claws into (secondary).


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 10, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> And I find myself doubting you actually bothered to read the story even more.  *Lyla was very clear when she said that the Montior was freed at the same time as the Anti-Monitor*.  Don't go dismissing that out of hand just because it does not fit with what you are trying to argue.  All you are doing right now is trying to forcibly imposing your version of events in the comics to suit your purposes.
> 
> In other words, the same kind of thing that happened with Lionel Suggs in the GetBackers deception.  But in your case, your "Get Backers" is Superman (primarily), and any other DC or Marvel character you can get your claws into (secondary).


Wrong.



"The Monitor, too, know lived again."

That statement does not imply that the Monitor and Anti-Monitor woke up at the same time.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 10, 2016)

People can read, you know.

"...Pariah,* there was one who could...one you also freed when your Universe perished*.  The Monitor, too, now lived again.  And he knew what his brother was planning.  *This time he would not wait to be attacked.  The Monitor would fight back and protect the Multiverse which was created the day he was born*."

The Monitor and Anti-Monitor were both freed with the death of Pariah's Universe.  That is the full context in which the Monitor and Anti-Monitor awakened.  The fact that the Monitor would not wait either means that he acted at the same time as the Anti-Monitor planned to destroy the Multiverse.  Not after several Universes were destroyed, *but from the very beginning.*


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 10, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> People can read, you know.
> 
> "...Pariah,* there was one who could...one you also freed when your Universe perished*.  The Monitor, too, now lived again.  And he knew what his brother was planning.  *This time he would not wait to be attacked.  The Monitor would fight back and protect the Multiverse which was created the day he was born*."
> 
> The Monitor and Anti-Monitor were both freed with the death of Pariah's Universe.  That is the full context in which the Monitor and Anti-Monitor awakened.  The fact that the Monitor would not wait either means that he acted at the same time as the Anti-Monitor planned to destroy the Multiverse.  Not after several Universes were destroyed, *but from the very beginning.*


Did it say that he was freed at the same time? No? Then please stop trying to downplay the Anti-Monitor by using figures of speech concerning an arbitrarily large amount of universes dying (such as 100 or 1000).


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 10, 2016)

"Infinite" is the figure of speech; the Monitor, Anti-Monitor, and Pariah all used a thousand when describing the number of Universes destroyed.  If they actually wanted a number that was closer to "infinite", they would have used something like millions or billions of Universes, not "a thousand".


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 10, 2016)

It can't be a figure of speech, because there is literally a vibrating plane holding the infinite universes. Which how Barry even got to Earth-2, because Flash's are can do vibrations and whatnot.






It's even explained why it's called a a Crisis on Infinite Earths.



Crisis on Infinite Earths is the most re-capped story in the DC universe ever. It was done at Infinite Crisis, it was done in Countdown, done in 52 weekly, done in Final Crisis, and done in Darkseid War.

And every single time, infinite universe or realities in the multiverse was brought up. Infinite Crisis changed all that with only 52 universes surviving.

By saying it was only a set amount of universes, you're contradicting the entire DCU history and cosmology, because of a sentence.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Toaa (Oct 11, 2016)

After anti monitor destroyed infinite universes he still left out 5 right?


----------



## Crackle (Oct 11, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> It can't be a figure of speech, because there is literally a vibrating plane holding the infinite universes. Which how Barry even got to Earth-2, because Flash's are can do vibrations and whatnot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Even in context it looks like a figure of speech. Especially in comics when characters describe otehr characters as having "omnipotent power" or "endless strength" or "power itself" the fact that there are actual numbers we can't accept "infinite" at face value if there's nothing to back this up and is pretty much contradicted by giving us an actual number. Every single time the word infinite is used the context is always "a ton of fucking universes" infinite is just more dramtic


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 11, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> "Infinite" is the figure of speech; the Monitor, Anti-Monitor, and Pariah all used a thousand when describing the number of Universes destroyed.  If they actually wanted a number that was closer to "infinite", they would have used something like millions or billions of Universes, not "a thousand".





> 3. The Anti-Monitor absorbs the energy of *more than one million* Earths. This coincides with the fact that as the Anti-Monitor destroys more Earths, the Anti-Matter Earth grows larger in turn.


Emphasis mine.

And there are "high end" figures of speech and "low end" figures of speech. The "more than a thousand" number given was clearly a low end figure of speech. Again, the omniscient narrator itself described the multiverse as an *infinitude*.

Omniscient narrator > your bullshit.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 11, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> By saying it was only a set amount of universes, you're contradicting the entire DCU history and cosmology, because of a sentence.



Three sentences, by three characters (the one who destroyed the Universes, the one who watched the Universes be destroyed, and the Monitor), spoken in the original event.

If you just throw around "infinite" all the time, then you can never truly quantify anything.


*"My universe will provide the power that I need".*

It was mentioned that the Anti-Matter Universe had at least 55 million worlds, millions of which also contained life.

*Your omniscient narrator specified that number in "Crisis on Infinite Earth".*

Nice attempt to take a panel you directly linked completely out of context, but I'm amazed you've stooped so far as to try to claim that the Anti-Montior was talking about "Earths and Universes", rather than *planets of the Anti-Matter Universe.
*
And no, don't try to claim that the Anti-Monitor "converts" all the Universes he destroyed into planets within the Anti-Matter Universe, because the whole point of the Anti-Monitor destroying Universes is to convert their energies into energy for himself.

The Anti-Monitor did not "create" the planets of the Anti-Matter Universe; he was born alongside them (or as "Final Crisis" established, he split off into that Universe).
*

*


----------



## Toaa (Oct 11, 2016)

....from the momment that after anti monitor destroyed infinite universes 5 remained this is shit and should not be used because its illogical


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 11, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Three sentences, by three characters (the one who destroyed the Universes, the one who watched the Universes be destroyed, and the Monitor), spoken in the original event.
> 
> If you just throw around "infinite" all the time, then you can never truly quantify anything.


You do realize that we'd have to throw away every statement that a multiverse is infinite in fiction simply because "hurr durr we can't quantify anything if the multiverse is infinite", even when those statements have no contradictions? 



> *"My universe will provide the power that I need".*


Because by that time, the universe had expanded to fill the void left by all of the destroyed positive matter universes. That statement also occurred in Crisis On Infinite Earths #8, when the Anti-Monitor had destroyed all but five universes of the infinite multiverse.



> It was mentioned that the Anti-Matter Universe had at least 55 million worlds, millions of which also contained life.
> 
> *Your omniscient narrator specified that number in "Crisis on Infinite Earth".*


Show me the scan that says that.



> Nice attempt to take a panel you directly linked completely out of context, but I'm amazed you've stooped so far as to try to claim that the Anti-Montior was talking about "Earths and Universes", rather than *planets of the Anti-Matter Universe.
> *
> And no, don't try to claim that the Anti-Monitor "converts" all the Universes he destroyed into planets within the Anti-Matter Universe, because the whole point of the Anti-Monitor destroying Universes is to convert their energies into energy for himself.
> 
> The Anti-Monitor did not "create" the planets of the Anti-Matter Universe; he was born alongside them (or as "Final Crisis" established, he split off into that Universe).


Nice try, but I'm too quick on the draw. And by my word, your downplay will fall.

Since you are claiming that the Anti-Monitor only drew upon the energy of planets, which is a positive claim backed up by literally nothing in Crisis On Infinite Earths, the burden of proof is on you to provide actual proof or evidence of this.


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 11, 2016)

your face is backed up by literally nothing

Reactions: Winner 2


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 12, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Show me the scan that says that.



If you need the scan, then it is proof that you do not have the volume on hand to read.

"Crisis On Infinite Earth #8" - "The Anti-Matter Universe stretches on for more than thirty-two zillion light years. * There are fifty-three million worlds, more than two million containing sentient life."* 


*Spoiler*: __ 




NOTE: "Zillion" is an undefined number, so any actual size to the Anti-Matter Universe at this point would most likely be the product of combining the sum volumes of the one thousand Universes the Anti-Monitor had destroyed, the universes which it expanded to fill, and finding the radius or diameter of the end result. 

In this case, "thirty-two zillion light years" is right up there with "one million decibels of white noise" in the category of "Sci-Fi Writers have No Sense of Scale".

 Basically, if my math is correct, increasing the volume of the Antimatter Universe by a thousand times only results in its own diameter by *ten times*, given the Square-Cube Law.  In other words, the Antimatter Universe was only 930 billion light years across at that point, if you apply actual math and scale to it.

And yet it only has fifty-three million worlds within it.  So consider the Antimatter Universe equivalent of Dark Energy to make up the rest of the mass-energy.



---------------------------------------
Within the same issue is when Anti-Monitor absorbs the energies of more than one million worlds in his Universe to travel back to the dawn of time.  I have the volume for "Crisis On Infinite Earths" in my lap right now, so I know what I am speaking of.  Anyone else who has the volume can check it and confirm my words.  



Tonathan100 said:


> Since you are claiming that the Anti-Monitor only drew upon the energy of planets, which is a positive claim backed up by literally nothing in Crisis On Infinite Earths, the burden of proof is on you to provide actual proof or evidence of this.



You are the guy who provided the link to the picture in the first place:


*Spoiler*: __ 








Yet you are the one who tried to twist the Anti-Monitor's words to mean one million *Earths*, rather than the worlds that we were told existed in the Anti-Matter Universe.  

Either way, the point is that the energies he drew upon were not more than one million *Earths, *but the energies of the worlds of his native Universe, and we were given a set number of those worlds.


----------



## Solar (Oct 12, 2016)

Did they really use "zillions"?


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 12, 2016)

Frederica Bernkastel said:


> Did they really use "zillions"?



Yep, the comic writer at the time really used "zillions".


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 12, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> If you need the scan, then it is proof that you do not have the volume on hand to read.
> 
> "Crisis On Infinite Earth #8" - "The Anti-Matter Universe stretches on for more than thirty-two zillion light years. * There are fifty-three million worlds, more than two million containing sentient life."*


Proving absolutely nothing, as by that time, the Anti-Matter had expanded to fill the void left by an infinite number of destroyed universes.





> 1. Again, the Anti-Matter Wave has left only 5 Earths out of the infinite Multiverse.


The quoted scan appears in Crisis On Infinite Earths *#6*.

And I said back up your statement with a *scan*. You're now blatantly shifting the burden of proof.



> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why such an arbitrary way of calculating? Why not simply finding the sum diameters of all of the universes the Anti-Monitor destroyed, and adding that to the diameter of the Antimatter Universe.



> In this case, "thirty-two zillion light years" is right up there with "one million decibels of white noise" in the category of "Sci-Fi Writers have No Sense of Scale".


Except that "one million decibels" is a consistent figure backed up multiple times, while "thirty-two zillion light-years" means nothing, since "zillion" is a meaningless, fictional, nonsensical number.



> Basically, if my math is correct, increasing the volume of the Antimatter Universe by a thousand times only results in its own diameter by *ten times*, given the Square-Cube Law.  In other words, the Antimatter Universe was only 930 billion light years across at that point, if you apply actual math and scale to it.
> 
> And yet it only has fifty-three million worlds within it.  So consider the Antimatter Universe equivalent of Dark Energy to make up the rest of the mass-energy.


Yes, because a guy who describes a universe to have a diameter with the term "zillions" clearly is the most accurate arbiter of the amount of worlds in that universe. 

And the Anti-Monitor destroyed infinite universes. Get over it.



> ---------------------------------------
> Within the same issue is when Anti-Monitor absorbs the energies of more than one million worlds in his Universe to travel back to the dawn of time.  I have the volume for "Crisis On Infinite Earths" in my lap right now, so I know what I am speaking of.  Anyone else who has the volume can check it and confirm my words.


Yes, because a guy who describes a universe to have a diameter with the term "zillions" clearly is the most accurate arbiter of the amount of worlds in that universe. 



> You are the guy who provided the link to the picture in the first place:
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...


Seriously?

My above scans alone prove that you are outright lying with your statement that he only absorbed the energy of one million planets.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 12, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Proving absolutely nothing, as by that time, the Anti-Matter had expanded to fill the void left by an infinite number of destroyed universes.





Tonathan100 said:


> The quoted scan appears in Crisis On Infinite Earths *#6*.
> 
> And I said back up your statement with a *scan*. You're now blatantly shifting the burden of proof.



You keep on repeating "infinite universes", but neither scan you presented mentions the word "infinite" in any shape or form.  The fact that so many Universes were reduced down to five at all is evidence of "infinite" being more of a figure of speech than "fact".  And the number of Universes stated to have been destroyed in the "Crisis On Infinite Earths"  story was "thousands" at most.



Tonathan100 said:


> *Why such an arbitrary way of calculating*? Why not simply finding the sum diameters of all of the universes the Anti-Monitor destroyed, and adding that to the diameter of the Antimatter Universe.



"Arbitrary"?  That's the Square/Cube law at work:

_When an object undergoes a proportional increase in size, its new volume is proportional to the cube of the multiplier and its new surface area is proportional to the square of the multiplier._

For the Antimatter Universe to expand to fill the void left behind by a destroyed Positive Matter Universe, that means an increase in the volume of the Antimatter Universe, based on the volume of the destroyed Universe.  

As dictated by the Square/Cube law, just doubling the diameter of a Universe even once leads to an *8x increase in volume.*  That is why the math I did turned out the way it did: with a thousand Universes destroyed at minimum, the Antimatter Universe expanding its volume to encompass the space of the destroyed Universes amounts to its overall diameter increasing by *ten times, *while its volume increases by 1000 times..

That is why this: 





> *simply finding the sum diameters of all of the universes the Anti-Monitor destroyed, and adding that to the diameter of the Antimatter Universe*



Is so flawed.



Tonathan100 said:


> Except that "one million decibels" is a consistent figure backed up multiple times, while "thirty-two zillion light-years" means nothing, since "zillion" is a meaningless, fictional, nonsensical number.



Do you even understand how Decibels work?  .

Decibels are logarithmic in nature.  Every time you go up by 10 Decibels on the Decibel scale, *that is a ten times increase in energy.  *Just going from 0 Decibels to 100 Decibels is a ten billion times increase in energy of the sound.  Just 1,100 Decibels would create a Universe-devouring Black Hole.

A million Decibels (if you obey actual physics and use Decibels correctly) nets you an energy level around *10^99,996 Joules.
*
So I have zero need to tell you why no one in their right mind would ever take that statement and number seriously (I hope). It doesn't matter if the number is used consistently if it is a blatantly wrong application of how Decibels actually work, especially if the feats do not match up in any shape or form.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 12, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> You keep on repeating "infinite universes", but neither scan you presented mentions the word "infinite" in any shape or form.


Okay then, here are the relevant scans.



>





> The fact that so many Universes were reduced down to five at all is evidence of "infinite" being more of a figure of speech than "fact".


Non-sequitur. All it means is that the Anti-Monitor can destroy an infinite amount of universes.



> And the number of Universes stated to have been destroyed in the "Crisis On Infinite Earths"  story was "thousands" at most.


Let's start with the scan that started this entire mess.



"Already, *more than* one thousand universes have died!" - The Monitor, Dax Novu

Are you honestly this stupid? Can you even read? The Monitor clearly stated that *more than* one thousand universe died. He never stated that *only* one thousand universes died.



> "Arbitrary"?  That's the Square/Cube law at work:
> 
> _When an object undergoes a proportional increase in size, its new volume is proportional to the cube of the multiplier and its new surface area is proportional to the square of the multiplier._
> 
> ...




The void left by each positive matter universe would have a *diameter* equivalent to that universe's diameter. For the Antimatter Universe to truly fill the void, then it would have to expand so that the diameter encompassed the diameter of the void.



> Do you even understand how Decibels work?  .
> 
> Decibels are logarithmic in nature.  Every time you go up by 10 Decibels on the Decibel scale, *that is a ten times increase in energy.*


Nice mathematics fuck up there.



> Just going from 0 Decibels to 100 Decibels is a ten billion times increase in energy of the sound.  Just 1,100 Decibels would create a Universe-devouring Black Hole.


Okay then.

Universe Level Cyborg confirmed.



> A million Decibels (if you obey actual physics and use Decibels correctly) nets you an energy level around *10^99,996 Joules.
> *
> So I have zero need to tell you why no one in their right mind would ever take that statement and number seriously (I hope). It doesn't matter if the number is used consistently if it is a blatantly wrong application of how Decibels actually work, *especially if the feats do not match up in any shape or form.*


You do realize that fictional attacks can have "compressed/condensed energy" that doesn't have to follow up on the law of conservation of mass-energy, and thus doesn't automatically disperse omnidirectionally entirely when released, right?

It's the same case with Cyborg's "one million decibels of white sound" attack. The figure is backed up extremely consistently throughout the comic book history of DC Comics.


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 12, 2016)

Tonathan trying to correct anyone at math is like RH saying he's unbiased when it comes to FT

Reactions: Agree 2 | Funny 1


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 12, 2016)

The last sentence with him trying to say Cyborg's "one million decibels" sound cannon is legit. That would put Cyborg at a level near his fanfic superman


----------



## Fang (Oct 12, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Non-sequitur. All it means is that the Anti-Monitor can destroy an infinite amount of universes.



His example is not a non sequitur. I've told you this before but claiming a fallacy falsely is a fallacy. 



> Let's start with the scan that started this entire mess.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So just 1001 universes then.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 12, 2016)

Productive thread.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Fang (Oct 12, 2016)

What's more embarrassing here?

Tonathan's wank of DC or Tonathan ruining math?

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 12, 2016)

both?

both

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 12, 2016)

OneSimpleAnime said:


> The last sentence with him trying to say Cyborg's "one million decibels" sound cannon is legit. That would put Cyborg at a level near his fanfic superman



Nonsense such as that is the reason why strict rules are in place about determining the nature of feats, isn't it?  He also did not seem understand what I meant by Decibels being logarithmic and the increase in energies, calling it "a mathematical f*** up".



Tonathan100 said:


> "Already, *more than* one thousand universes have died!" - The Monitor, Dax Novu
> 
> Are you honestly this stupid? Can you even read? The Monitor clearly stated that *more than* one thousand universe died. He never stated that *only* one thousand universes died.



You're trying to tilt the scale between "statements that gives *no set number"* and "statements that give *a set number."*

We have heard the Anti-Monitor himself say that he has destroyed "A thousand Universes and more", *and he of all people should know what he is talking about.  *Pariah said that he has witnessed the destruction of a thousand Universe, *so he knows first hand how many Universes died.*  The Monitor, given his life and power is connected to the Positive Universes, would also know how many Universes have died, and he said more than *a thousand.  *If it was a number even one magnitude higher, there'd be no point in all three saying "a thousand".  Why not have them say "ten thousand", or any number higher than that.

*Or am I to assume that a genius scientist from another Universe and two cosmic entities can't count past a thousand?*

You should be damn well aware why no one else goes around flaunting "this guy has infinite power so he beats everybody", and that applies to anything that, contrary to any grandiose statements, *has proven itself to have a finite limit.* 

The Marvel Universe, even with numbered Universe going up to *tens of trillions, *had a limit to its size, because the Beyonders went and tore down the entire Marvel Multiverse through their Incursions, and even they were eventually nuked by Doctor Doom with a Molecule Man bomb, and proceeded to steal all their power in the process.

The same goes for the DC Multiverse, since the Anti-Monitor succeeded in destroying the Multiverse down to five Universes, and there are multiple instances throughout the event of "a thousand Universes" being destroyed by the Anti-Monitor.

We cannot use "infinite" to quantify anything, so the priority goes to the statement with a set number to it.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 13, 2016)

Fang said:


> His example is not a non sequitur. I've told you this before but claiming a fallacy falsely is a fallacy.


How does a multiverse not being infinite logically follow from an entity being able to destroy said multiverse?

I just love how what was certainly considered Outskirts Battledome consensus before (the Pre-Crisis DC Comics Multiverse being infinite) is now being outright downplayed because I agree with said consensus. You and GiveRobert20Dollars are literally agreeing with Catalyst75 here solely to spite me for some retarded reason.



> So just 1001 universes then.




No.

The statement "*more than* a thousand" is not a contradiction of the statement "infinite", since infinity is *more than* one thousand.



Catalyst75 said:


> Nonsense such as that is the reason why strict rules are in place about determining the nature of feats, isn't it?  He also did not seem understand what I meant by Decibels being logarithmic and the increase in energies, calling it "a mathematical f*** up".


Decibels increasing ten times in energy for every ten decibels added is a linear increase. And since it is a consistently backed up statement, it is valid.




> You're trying to tilt the scale between "statements that gives *no set number"* and "statements that give *a set number."*
> 
> We have heard the Anti-Monitor himself say that he has destroyed "A thousand Universes and more", *and he of all people should know what he is talking about.*


Show me the scans. And again, can you read? He clearly stated "a  thousand universes *and more*". Again, the statement "more than a thousand" is not a contradiction of the statement "infinite", since infinity is more than one thousand.



> Pariah said that he has witnessed the destruction of a thousand Universe, *so he knows first hand how many Universes died.*


You can't even get your downplay correct.



> 3. Pariah has seen a hundred Earths die because of the Anti-Matter Wave.


And even statement shown in the quoted scan is a figure of speech, since Pariah was sent to the Monitor satellite by the time of Crisis On Infinite Earths, so he obviously didn't see every universe die. Again, the omniscient narrator itself stated that the multiverse was infinite. Omniscient narrator statements have much more value than character statements unless the omniscient narrator was irreconcilably contradicted by an *event*.





> The Monitor, given his life and power is connected to the Positive Universes, would also know how many Universes have died, and he said more than *a thousand.  *If it was a number even one magnitude higher, there'd be no point in all three saying "a thousand".  *Why not have them say "ten thousand", or any number higher than that.*


Because those statements were figures of speech. 



> *Or am I to assume that a genius scientist from another Universe and two cosmic entities can't count past a thousand?*


Again, figures of speech.



> You should be damn well aware why no one else goes around flaunting "this guy has infinite power so he beats everybody", and that applies to anything that, contrary to any grandiose statements, *has proven itself to have a finite limit.*


We can use infinity to quantify the number of elements or objects within a set, such as the number of universes within a multiverse. Removing everything within an "infinite" set does not logically make that set finite.



> The Marvel Universe, even with numbered Universe going up to *tens of trillions, *had a limit to its size, because the Beyonders went and tore down the entire Marvel Multiverse through their Incursions, and even they were eventually nuked by Doctor Doom with a Molecule Man bomb, and proceeded to steal all their power in the process.




The Marvel Comics Multiverse is infinite. To say it cannot because it can be destroyed is a complete non-sequitur.



> The same goes for the DC Multiverse, since the Anti-Monitor succeeded in destroying the Multiverse down to five Universes, and there are multiple instances throughout the event of "a thousand Universes" being destroyed by the Anti-Monitor.


See above. And your figures of speech (which don't even irreconcilably contradict anything about the multiverse being infinite) are not proof at all that the multiverse is finite.



> We cannot use "infinite" to quantify anything, so the priority goes to the statement with a set number to it.


We can use infinity to quantify the number of elements or objects within a set, such as the number of universes within a multiverse. Removing everything within an "infinite" set does not logically make that set finite.


----------



## Fang (Oct 13, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> *snip for nonsense*



You don't know how to use fallacies and you incorrectly used your attempt to reach at claiming he was making a non sequitur. Get over it. Also your awful attempt at poisoning the well doesn't work either by trying to question our motives.



> No.



Yep.



> The statement "*more than* a thousand" is not a contradiction of the statement "infinite", since infinity is *more than* one thousand.



More than a thousand is ambiguous and can solely mean 1000 and 1 together. You don't get to ass fuck cardinality or set numbers that way to cherry pick how they work.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 13, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Decibels increasing ten times in energy for every ten decibels added is a linear increase. And since it is a consistently backed up statement, it is valid.





100 Decibels is *one billion times more powerful* than 10 Decibels. 

Logarithmic scales, which are used by Decibels, *ARE NON-LINEAR.  *That is what I mean by energy increasing by ten times *every time* you go up by 10 Decibels on the scale: 10 Decibels have 10x more power than 0 Decibel; 20 Decibels have 100x more power than 0 Decibels; 30 Decibels have 1000x more power than 0 Decibels; 40 Decibels have 10000x more power than 0 Decibels, etc.

No one takes "1,000,000 Decibels of white sound" at face value, nor should use it as face value, because anyone with the most basic grasp of how Decibels works knows that specific number, in relation to Decibels, is completely ludicrous, especially for how little effect that "white sound" actually has one anyone it is turned against.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 13, 2016)

Fang said:


> You don't know how to use fallacies and you incorrectly used your attempt to reach at claiming he was making a non sequitur. Get over it.


Explain how what I just did was a misuse of fallacies, since I clearly explained how that was a non-sequitur. Otherwise, get over it.



> Also your awful attempt at poisoning the well doesn't work either by trying to question our motives.


Except that you never disagreed with the number of universes in the Pre-Crisis DC Comics multiverse being infinite until now. So it's not well-poisoning, it's stating facts.



> Yep.


No.




> More than a thousand is ambiguous and can solely mean 1000 and 1 together. You don't get to ass fuck cardinality or set numbers that way to cherry pick how they work.


I can if a much more valid omniscient narrator statement states that a set is infinite.



Catalyst75 said:


> 100 Decibels is *one billion times more powerful* than 10 Decibels.
> 
> Logarithmic scales, which are used by Decibels, *ARE NON-LINEAR.  *That is what I mean by energy increasing by ten times *every time* you go up by 10 Decibels on the scale: 10 Decibels have 10x more power than 0 Decibel; 20 Decibels have 100x more power than 0 Decibels; 30 Decibels have 1000x more power than 0 Decibels; 40 Decibels have 10000x more power than 0 Decibels, etc.


I see...



> No one takes "1,000,000 Decibels of white sound" at face value, nor should use it as face value, because anyone with the most basic grasp of how Decibels works knows that specific number, in relation to Decibels, is completely ludicrous, especially for how little effect that "white sound" actually has one anyone it is turned against.


Except for the fact that:

1. The statement is consistently stated.
2. Attack potency =/= area of effect is a thing.


----------



## Fang (Oct 13, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Explain how what I just did was a misuse of fallacies, since I clearly explained how that was a non-sequitur. Otherwise, get over it.



You don't know how to use fallacies and you incorrectly used your attempt to reach at claiming he was making a non sequitur. Get over it. Also your awful attempt at poisoning the well doesn't work either by trying to question our motives.

Also the burden of proof isn't on me here either. 



> Except that you never disagreed with the number of universes in the Pre-Crisis DC Comics multiverse being infinite until now. So it's not well-poisoning, it's stating facts.



Stop making non sequiturs now with your strawman arguments. I interjected when you claimed more than a thousand equates to infinite.



> No.



Yep.



> I can if a much more valid omniscient narrator statement states that a set is infinite.



Nope.

Again, you don't know how mathematics work.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 13, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Except for the fact that:
> 
> 1. The statement is consistently stated.
> 2. Attack potency =/= area of effect is a thing.





Still on about this?  I do not care if it is some hallowed statement used by comic writers ever since it was introduced.  The actual numbers that translating that statement into Joules would produce is completely unreasonable.  Not just unreasonable, but it is the kind of claptrap that only Lionel Suggs would consider credible (and you, apparently).

And no, attack potency =/= area of effect does not work in this case, because the number of Joules you get out of 1,000,000 Decibels is so high up the scale that it doesn't even rank on any of Outskirts Battledome's charts..

We're talking the range of  *1*10^99,996 Joules.*

The above number could, theoretically, wipe every known fictional Universe combined in one shot.

*NOTE: Credit to Chie for doing the initial Math .  It's just shy of 10^100,000 (if you can call four magnitudes "shy of") because 1 Joule/Watt of energy registers at 30 dB on the scale.  0 dB is 0.001 Watts.
*
So in this case it does not matter how many times it was "consistently stated", because there is no way in Hell that any feat involving that statement being used could ever actually represent the actual amount of energy that would be contained within 1,000,000 Decibels.

The actual use of the White Sound Gun has only ever done minor environmental damage, blown up a shadow demon (back in "Crisis on Infinite Earths"), or just induce a major headache and aching ear-drums.  In other words, nothing close to a level of energy that could obliterate all known fictional Universes.  



*




*


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 13, 2016)

Fang said:


> You don't know how to use fallacies and you incorrectly used your attempt to reach at claiming he was making a non sequitur. Get over it. Also your awful attempt at poisoning the well doesn't work either by trying to question our motives.




Did you even *try* to refute me there?



> Also the burden of proof isn't on me here either.


Nice job shifting the burden of proof.



> Stop making non sequiturs now with your strawman arguments. I interjected when you claimed more than a thousand equates to infinite.


Even if I did claim that, my main point in saying that was that "more than a thousand" doesn't contradict "infinite. And my point was...



> They all said "*more* than a thousand". So they did not give a *definite limit* to the amount of universes destroyed.


Which is correct. Saying that a set has "more than n" number of elements means that "n" is not a definite limit to the number of elements to the set.



> Yep.


Again, no, and I clearly explained why in previous posts.



> Nope.
> 
> Again, you don't know how mathematics work.


Then please explain how having the capacity to remove all elements in an "infinite" set makes the set finite, and not that the "remover" is simply capable of removing infinite elements at once.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 13, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Still on about this?  I do not care if it is some hallowed statement used by comic writers ever since it was introduced.  The actual numbers that translating that statement into Joules would produce is completely unreasonable.  Not just unreasonable, but it is the kind of claptrap that only Lionel Suggs would consider credible (and you, apparently).


So because it doesn't follow what you personally believe is reasonable, it is unusable? You do realize I can just as easily say the same for any feat in any series franchise that you like, right?

Seriously, this is an argument on the tier of "hurr durr breaks the setting" in stupidity.



> And no, attack potency =/= area of effect does not work in this case, because the number of Joules you get out of 1,000,000 Decibels is so high up the scale that it doesn't even rank on any of Outskirts Battledome's charts..
> 
> We're talking the range of  *1*10^99,996 Joules.
> 
> NOTE: Credit to Chie for doing the initial Math .  It's just shy of 10^100,000 (if you can call four magnitudes "shy of") because 1 Joule/Watt of energy registers at 30 dB on the scale.  0 dB is 0.001 Watts.*


Please explain how the sheer energy output of the attack excludes it from ignoring the law of conservation of mass-energy, like most attacks do in fiction.



> So in this case it does not matter how many times it was "consistently stated", because there is no way in Hell that any feat involving that statement being used could ever actually represent the actual amount of energy that would be contained within 1,000,000 Decibels.


See above.



> The actual use of the White Sound Gun has only ever done minor environmental damage, blown up a shadow demon (back in "Crisis on Infinite Earths"), or just induce a major headache and aching ear-drums.
> 
> The above number could, theoretically, wipe every known fictional Universe combined in one shot.


You do realize that there are infinite multiverses (and extramultiversal sets) within fiction, right? The White Sound Gun cannot destroy those.


----------



## Fang (Oct 13, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


>



I'll accept the weak attempt at using an emoticon as another concession from you.



> Did you even *try* to refute me there?



I already refuted you when you consistently have missused fallacies throughout your history in the OBD as well as your consistent dishonesty when it comes to feats from comics in general.  You have to prove you weren't wrong, not me.



> Nice job shifting the burden of proof.



I didn't try to shift anything, its how logically one works. Burden of proof is on the person exerting their claims...i.e. you. 



> Even if I did claim that,



Textbook flipflopping? I knew it as usual given your MO.



> my main point in saying that was that "more than a thousand" doesn't contradict "infinite.



More than a 1000 is 1000 < +1

It does not equate 1000 + an undefined limit to ∞ aka infinity



> Which is correct. Saying that a set has "more than n" number of elements means that "n" is not a definite limit to the number of elements to the set.



This level of mental gymnastics your pushing doesn't equate or come out to that conclusion in anyway. So wrong again.



> Again, no, and I clearly explained why in previous posts.



Nope, you didn't. So still only 1000 + an unknown limit. I can do this all day.




> Then please explain how having the capacity to remove all elements in an "infinite" set makes the set finite, and not that the "remover" is simply capable of removing infinite elements at once.



That's a lot of circular bullshit to push on me to disprove when you can't prove it in the first place.


----------



## Gunstarvillain (Oct 13, 2016)

Where is this going? 
I just can't read all of that.
What's concensus? Stalemate or what, because as far as I know mon caught an L in which was tried on CK twice and he still consumed everything sending himself to the end of everything.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 13, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> So because it doesn't follow what you personally believe is reasonable, it is unusable? You do realize I can just as easily say the same for any feat in any series franchise that you like, right?
> 
> Seriously, this is an argument on the tier of "hurr durr breaks the setting" in stupidity.



The fact that your argument has turned into relying on the "infinity fallacy", and three different arguments (and counting) to somehow excuse the White Sound Gun actually having that amount of energy, doesn't really give your statement that much weight to it.



Tonathan100 said:


> Please explain how the sheer energy output of the attack excludes it from ignoring the law of conservation of mass-energy, like most attacks do in fiction.



I don't even have words to describe this statement.

Do you honestly understand what you are trying to argue, at this point?  That number of Decibels probably only exists in relation to Cyborg in the first place because the first guy who wrote that statement likely did not have a sense of what a Decibel actually was, or how Decibels works.  And there are at least two other instances with other characters where the same mis-interpretation takes place.



Tonathan100 said:


> You do realize that there are infinite multiverses (and extramultiversal sets) within fiction, right? The White Sound Gun cannot destroy those.



This is exactly what I mean by the "Infinity Fallacy" you are trying to exploit.  You are also making the assumptions that all of these authors would have had something within the number range of 10^10,000 in mind when they create their "infinite multiverses".

The number of fictions in existence, on the other hand, is vastly smaller than that number by leaps and bounds, even including those Universes with Multiverses.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 14, 2016)

Fang said:


> I'll accept the weak attempt at using an emoticon as another concession from you.


I wasn't conceding.




> I already refuted you when you consistently have missused fallacies throughout your history in the OBD as well as your consistent dishonesty when it comes to feats from comics in general.  You have to prove you weren't wrong, not me.


That isn't how burden of proof works. And this is also textbook well-poisoning, by using previous histories to say that my point is invalid.




> I didn't try to shift anything, its how logically one works. Burden of proof is on the person exerting their claims...i.e. you.


But you exerted claims, specifically that I was misusing fallacies, that haven't been backed up.




> Textbook flipflopping? I knew it as usual given your MO.


It isn't flip-flopping. Because I didn't say that "more than 1000 equals infinity".




> More than a 1000 is 1000 < +1
> 
> It does not equate 1000 + an undefined limit to ∞ aka infinity


I never stated that.




> This level of mental gymnastics your pushing doesn't equate or come out to that conclusion in anyway. So wrong again.


If your going to say "hurr durr you're wrong", then explain how a person is wrong.




> Nope, you didn't. So still only 1000 + an unknown limit. I can do this all day.


Yes, I did.



I can do this all day as well.



> That's a lot of circular bullshit to push on me to disprove when you can't prove it in the first place.


Explain how that is circular reasoning. If you can remove all elements from an "infinite" set, then the most likely answer of the matter is that you can remove infinite elements at once.


----------



## Fang (Oct 14, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> *snip*.





Fang said:


> I'll accept the weak attempt at using an emoticon as another concession from you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 14, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> The fact that your argument has turned into relying on the "infinity fallacy"


What is the "infinity fallacy"? Oh wait, something that doesn't even exist. And if it does, I didn't use it.



> and three different arguments (and counting) to somehow excuse the White Sound Gun actually having that amount of energy, doesn't really give your statement that much weight to it.


I only gave one, the fact that fiction usually ignores conservation of mass-energy.




> I don't even have words to describe this statement.
> 
> Do you honestly understand what you are trying to argue, at this point?  That number of Decibels probably only exists in relation to Cyborg in the first place because the first guy who wrote that statement likely did not have a sense of what a Decibel actually was, or how Decibels works.  And there are at least two other instances with other characters where the same mis-interpretation takes place.


I do understand. And your dodging the question. How does an incredibly high amount of energy being produced suddenly preclude that energy output being "condensed/compressed" so that it ignores conservation of mass-energy.



> This is exactly what I mean by the "Infinity Fallacy" you are trying to exploit.




Simply calling a set "infinite" is by no means fallacious. And the concept of infinity, in and of itself, is not fallacious.

By your own logic, the concept of aleph numbers should be thrown out because "hurr durr infinity is a fallacy".



> You are also making the assumptions that all of these authors would have had something within the number range of 10^10,000 in mind when they create their "infinite multiverses".


They obviously didn't. They actually had *an infinite amount* of universes in mind, which should be self-evident when they called their multiverses "infinite".



> The number of fictions in existence, on the other hand, is vastly smaller than that number by leaps and bounds, even including those Universes with Multiverses.


And this is supposed to mean anything...why?


----------



## Toaa (Oct 14, 2016)

...this thread why....why still arguing about cyborg any logical person wod easily understand that you kust be braindead to accept that 

We may give some leaway to the writers but when they are blatantly bullshitting just flush their opinion down the toilet


----------



## Fang (Oct 14, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


>



It doesn't work that way, either put up the proof which is on you (which you can't in the first place), or concede. We all know you are a troll who can't into math or comics.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 14, 2016)

yujiro said:


> ...this thread why....



I feel like this thread devolved into a critique of Ton's argument style itself, or lack thereof.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 14, 2016)

Fang said:


> It doesn't work that way, either put up the proof which is on you (which you can't in the first place), or concede. We all know you are a troll who can't into math or comics.


I just did.


----------



## Fang (Oct 14, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> I feel like this thread devolved into a critique of Ton's argument style itself, or lack thereof.



Of course it is. The best way to deal with Tonathan is also to simply stonewall his nonsense.



Tonathan100 said:


> I just did.



No you didn't. Where's the proof?

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Toaa (Oct 14, 2016)

...i dont think he has much of an argument...or any evidence to support it


----------



## Toaa (Oct 14, 2016)

Fang said:


> Of course it is. The best way to deal with Tonathan is also to simply stonewall his nonsense.




I dont thinm there is a way to deal with tonathan


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 14, 2016)

Fang said:


> Of course it is. The best way to deal with Tonathan is also to simply stonewall his nonsense.


Really now? Resorting to fallacies just to irritate me?




> No you didn't. Where's the proof?


Did you even read the scan where the omniscient narrator said that the multiverse was an infinitude?



yujiro said:


> ...i dont think he has much of an argument...or any evidence to support it


The argument is now whether the Pre-Crisis DC Comics Multiverse is infinite or not. And it is.


----------



## Fang (Oct 14, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Really now? Resorting to fallacies just to irritate me?



You don't know how a fallacy works for the uptenth time. Try again.



> Did you even read the scan where the omniscient narrator said that the multiverse was an infinitude?



Still waiting for you to stop moving the goal posts, accept the burden of proof, and provide evidence that "more than a thousand" equates to infinity, strawman kun.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 14, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> What is the "infinity fallacy"? Oh wait, something that doesn't even exist. And if it does, I didn't use it.



Consider it related to "No Limits Fallacy" - just as some people will claim that something has no limit "because a limit wasn't demonstrated", you are trying to push for "infinite Universes" despite the fact that there is both a given range for the number of Universes destroyed (a thousand), and the fact that Anti-Monitor was able to reduce the Multiverse down to five Universes.



Tonathan100 said:


> I do understand. And your dodging the question. How does an incredibly high amount of energy being produced suddenly preclude that energy output being* "condensed/compressed" so that it ignores conservation of mass-energy*.



None of the feats that involve said statement reflect anything close to what the level of energy implied by the statement would actually do.

You cannot, in any shape or form, use "attack potency =/= area of effect" in this situation; you cannot make claims of "condensed/compressed" energy so that they...ignore conservation of mass-energy...



Because that is not how energy works.  When you concentrate energy into a specific point, *potency is increased* compared to the same amount of energy spread out over a wide area or volume.  

At this point, you are just trying to deflect from the fact that the statement, on a functional level, *is inherently flawed and non-feasible.* 

*THE WRITER.  WHO INITIALLY WROTE THAT LINE.  MADE A MISTAKE.  IN UNDERSTANDING.  HOW DECIBELS.  WORK!
*
As a result, no one in their right mind could ever think that "one million decibels" is actually legitimate, no matter how many writers recycle the line.



Tonathan100 said:


> Simply calling a set "infinite" is by no means fallacious. And the concept of infinity, in and of itself, is not fallacious.



*In the context within which you are trying to force it to apply to - in the context of your argument -* *it is fallacious.  * You keep insisting that an "infinite number of Universes" had to have been destroyed in "Crisis on Infinite Earths", yet we know for a fact that the Anti-Monitor, one of the people who has stated that a thousand Universes were destroyed, *brought the multiverse down to five Universes.
*
If you can reduce a Multiverse down to five Universes, that means that the number of Universes in the Multiverse *was a finite set,* to begin with.  The statements wherein "a thousand Universes" are mentioned give us an idea of the size of the set of Universes in the DC Multiverses.  In other words, agreeing statements that correlates with what we know about "Crisis on Infinite Earths" - the DC Multiverse was reduced down to five Universes, and the statements indicate that it was reduced down to five from a thousand Universes at minimum (the last remaining Universes would make it a thousand and five at minimum).



Tonathan100 said:


> They obviously didn't. They actually had *an infinite amount* of universes in mind, which should be self-evident when they called their multiverses "infinite".





Tonathan100 said:


> And this is supposed to mean anything...why?



How big, exactly, do you think numbers can go?  

Andrei Linde is a physicist who proposed the chaotic inflation theory, in which "our universe is one of many other universes with different physical constants that originated as part *of our local section of the multiverse,* owing to a vacuum that had not decayed to its ground state". 

Here is the number that Linde and Vanchurin came up with for the total number of those Universes: 

For those who can't see the image: 10^10^10,000,000.

To put this into perspective:  Googol = 10^100; Googolplex = 10^10^100, or 10^Googol, or one followed by a Googol of zeroes.

So let me be perfectly, clear as crystal when I say this: no matter how many times you push for an "infinite number" of Universes, I do not think that anyone in their right mind would dare to claim that the above number would be applicable for any form of Multiverse in any fiction, especially when we are talking about crossover battles in fiction, not even if they claim to have "infinite universes" or "infinite multiverses".

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Toaa (Oct 15, 2016)

^basically that the discussion should end


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 15, 2016)

yujiro said:


> ^basically that the discussion should end



I hope that is the case.  I'm admittedly taking a big gamble bringing a number that big from a cosmological theory into the picture.


----------



## Toaa (Oct 15, 2016)

^he will find some way to apply it to supes or apply to someone find an instance of supes getting stomped and apply it to supes while saying supes was casual as fuck




Catalyst75 said:


> I hope that is the case. I'm admittedly taking a big gamble bringing a number that big from a cosmological theory into the picture.


----------



## Gunstarvillain (Oct 15, 2016)

CK wins ja?


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 15, 2016)

Fang said:


> You don't know how a fallacy works for the uptenth time. Try again.


Stonewalling is argumentum ad nauseam, a fallacy.



> Still waiting for you to stop moving the goal posts, accept the burden of proof, and provide evidence that "more than a thousand" equates to infinity, strawman kun.


I didn't move any goalposts, I satisfied my burden of proof, and I never stated that "more than 1000 = infinity".



Catalyst75 said:


> Consider it related to "No Limits Fallacy" - just as some people will claim that something has no limit "because a limit wasn't demonstrated", you are trying to push for "infinite Universes" despite the fact that there is both a given range for the number of Universes destroyed (a thousand), and the fact that Anti-Monitor was able to reduce the Multiverse down to five Universes.


Not only did it was said that "*more than* a thousand" universes died (meaning that the statement doesn't contradict infinite universes being destroyed), but the simplest answer than fits the facts of the Anti-Monitor being able to reduce an infinite multiverse to five universes is the Anti-Monitor simply being able to destroy infinite universes.




> None of the feats that involve said statement reflect anything close to what the level of energy implied by the statement would actually do.
> 
> You cannot, in any shape or form, use "attack potency =/= area of effect" in this situation; you cannot make claims of "condensed/compressed" energy so that they...ignore conservation of mass-energy...
> 
> ...


And the energy doesn't disperse omnidirectionally when the energy itself is concentrated into a specific point, which is my entire point explaining why the one million decibel sound gun doesn't destroy a universe or a finite multiverse.



> At this point, you are just trying to deflect from the fact that the statement, on a functional level, *is inherently flawed and non-feasible.*
> 
> *THE WRITER.  WHO INITIALLY WROTE THAT LINE.  MADE A MISTAKE.  IN UNDERSTANDING.  HOW DECIBELS.  WORK!
> *
> As a result, no one in their right mind could ever think that "one million decibels" is actually legitimate, no matter how many writers recycle the line.




You are going off of author's intent, one which is entirely unknown by the way, to disregard this feat.

No. There is a reason that we disregard author's intent in most cases in the OBD.



> *In the context within which you are trying to force it to apply to - in the context of your argument -* *it is fallacious.  * You keep insisting that an "infinite number of Universes" had to have been destroyed in "Crisis on Infinite Earths", yet we know for a fact that the Anti-Monitor, one of the people who has stated that a thousand Universes were destroyed, *brought the multiverse down to five Universes.*


And this is supposed to prove something why? And the Anti-Monitor said that a "thousand universes *and more*" have died, not that only 1000 universes total died.



> If you can reduce a Multiverse down to five Universes, that means that the number of Universes in the Multiverse *was a finite set,* to begin with.


And you have proof of how such an argument logically follows from an "infinite" multiverse being reduced to a finite one? Otherwise, you're just making a non-sequitur.



> The statements wherein "a thousand Universes" are mentioned give us an idea of the size of the set of Universes in the DC Multiverses.  In other words, agreeing statements that correlates with what we know about "Crisis on Infinite Earths" - the DC Multiverse was reduced down to five Universes, and the statements indicate that it was reduced down to five from a thousand Universes at minimum (the last remaining Universes would make it a thousand and five at minimum).


In all of those statements, they all said "*more than* a thousand", thus not contradicting "infinite".





> How big, exactly, do you think numbers can go?
> 
> Andrei Linde is a physicist who proposed the chaotic inflation theory, in which "our universe is one of many other universes with different physical constants that originated as part *of our local section of the multiverse,* owing to a vacuum that had not decayed to its ground state".
> 
> ...


Seriously?



If a multiverse is stated to be infinite, and the statement is not contradicted, then it is infinite, period.


----------



## Toaa (Oct 15, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Not only did it was said that "*more than* a thousand" universes died (meaning that the statement doesn't contradict infinite universes being destroyed), but the simplest answer than fits the facts of the Anti-Monitor being able to reduce an infinite multiverse to five universes is the Anti-Monitor simply being able to destroy infinite universes


 

What you cant seem to grasp is that you cant get 5 universes from infinite ones its really simple 5 is a finite number you cant substract a number from infinite that makes infinite 5 its  a mathematical seppuku lv mistake 


As for the million decibels


Tonathan100 said:


> You are going off of author's intent, one which is entirely unknown by the way, to disregard this feat.
> 
> No. There is a reason that we disregard author's intent in most cases in the OBD.




We are also disregarding the number




Tonathan100 said:


> In all of those statements, they all said "*more than* a thousand", thus not contradicting "infinite".



There is an infinite gap bettween more than a thousand and inifnite no logical person would ever use more than a thousand and mean infinite


----------



## Fang (Oct 15, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Stonewalling is argumentum ad nauseam, a fallacy.



Not a fallacy. Also neither is repeating my self ad naseum (repeatedly) a fallacy.



> I didn't move any goalposts, I satisfied my burden of proof, and I never stated that "more than 1000 = infinity".



You did:



Tonathan100 said:


> Ho
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can literally scroll up and see how often you lie and contradict yourself in your previous posts.



> I satisfied my burden of proof



You didn't.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 15, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> And the energy doesn't disperse omnidirectionally when the energy itself is concentrated into a specific point, which is my entire point explaining why the one million decibel sound gun doesn't destroy a universe or a finite multiverse.



Yet somehow doesn't completely:

1. Obliterate all the fabric of reality it is projected towards, or 

2. create a Megaverse-devouring black hole since, omnidirectional or directed, that amount of energy would bend space-time to such an extent, *since energy has the same effect of bending space-time as mass does.



Tonathan100 said:



			Seriously?



If a multiverse is stated to be infinite, and the statement is not contradicted, then it is infinite, period.
		
Click to expand...



*
I believe that the "thousand Universes"  statements would be contradictory to that, since we were given that stated number.  I believe that, the fact that the Multiverse could be destroyed all the way down to five Universes in the first place, contradicts the idea that the Multiverse was "infinite" to begin with.

Those are the contradictions to the idea that is "infinite".


----------



## Toaa (Oct 15, 2016)

Fang said:


> I can literally scroll up and see how often you lie and contradict yourself in your previous posts




In this particular case he contradicted himself on the same post 



Tonathan100 said:


> I didn't move any goalposts, I satisfied my burden of proof, and I never stated that "more than 1000 = infinity".






Tonathan100 said:


> Not only did it was said that "*more than* a thousand" universes died (meaning that the statement doesn't contradict infinite universes being destroyed), but the simplest answer than fits the facts of the Anti-Monitor being able to reduce an infinite multiverse to five universes is the Anti-Monitor simply being able to destroy infinite universes.


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 15, 2016)

Ton if we took the "1,000,000 decibels" thing seriously, it would mean that anyone hit by it would have durability better than the infinite multiverse of DC that you are arguing for. 

The person could literally stand there and not feel shit from nearly any character in the entirety of fiction bar fucking omnipotents


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 15, 2016)

yujiro said:


> What you cant seem to grasp is that you cant get 5 universes from infinite ones its really simple 5 is a finite number you cant substract a number from infinite that makes infinite 5 its  a mathematical seppuku lv mistake


What? Speak English, man. And you can subtract a number from an infinity that makes that infinity a finite number. All you need is a infinity that is a subset of the previous infinity.



> As for the million decibels
> 
> 
> 
> We are also disregarding the number


For what reason.




> There is an infinite gap bettween more than a thousand and inifnite no logical person would ever use more than a thousand and mean infinite


In Crisis On Infinite Earths, they do, since an infinite amount of universes was involved in the event, as stated by the omniscient narrator. And since infinity is more than one thousand, the two statements do not contradict each other.



Fang said:


> Not a fallacy. Also neither is repeating my self ad naseum (repeatedly) a fallacy.







> You did:
> 
> 
> 
> I can literally scroll up and see how often you lie and contradict yourself in your previous posts.


Apparently, you are incapable of actually reading. I said that the statement of "more than a thousand" is *not a contradiction* of the statement "infinity", not that it *equals* that statement.




> You didn't.


I did.



Catalyst75 said:


> Yet somehow doesn't completely:
> 
> 1. Obliterate all the fabric of reality it is projected towards, or
> 
> 2. create a Megaverse-devouring black hole since, omnidirectional or directed, that amount of energy would bend space-time to such an extent, *since energy has the same effect of bending space-time as mass does.*


1. Because it is condensed/compressed energy.
2. Most attacks in fiction tend to ignore the environmental effects those attacks would have if used in real life. It's the same reason that most Continent Level attacks don't immediately Life Wipe the planet.
*
*


> *
> *
> I believe that the "thousand Universes"  statements would be contradictory to that, since we were given that stated number.


They said "*more than* a thousand" universes, which doesn't contradict the term "infinite".



> I believe that, the fact that the Multiverse could be destroyed all the way down to five Universes in the first place, contradicts the idea that the Multiverse was "infinite" to begin with.
> 
> Those are the contradictions to the idea that is "infinite".


Wrong. It just means that the person destroying said multiverse can destroy an infinite amount of universes.


----------



## Fang (Oct 15, 2016)

Not a fallacious usage on my part. For someone like you, its necessary to repeat myself.



> Apparently, you are incapable of actually reading.



Parroting isn't working for you either.



> I said that the statement of "more than a thousand" is *not a contradiction* of the statement "infinity", not that it *equals* that statement.



You're as bad at English as you are at mathematics. More than a thousand is still finite, this is textbook stuff. You also contradict yourself by applying a defined quantity with an unknown one which does not work with set numbers with cardinality.

You just look worse with every post you make.



> I did.



You didn't.


----------



## Agent9149 (Oct 15, 2016)

OneSimpleAnime said:


> Ton if we took the "1,000,000 decibels" thing seriously, it would mean that anyone hit by it would have durability better than the infinite multiverse of DC that you are arguing for.
> 
> The person could literally stand there and not feel shit from nearly any character in the entirety of fiction bar fucking omnipotents



I FOR ONE AM READY FOR MEGAVERSAL CYBORG


----------



## Blocky (Oct 15, 2016)

I guess the USS Enterprise is megaversal level if we go by ton's logic..

Such a genius, am I right?


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> 1. Because it is condensed/compressed energy.
> 2. Most attacks in fiction tend to ignore the environmental effects those attacks would have if used in real life. It's the same reason that most Continent Level attacks don't immediately Life Wipe the planet.



1. Condensed/compressed energy *would just make it that much easier to do that.
*
2. In this situation, that is not the case because the statement is inherently flawed, *and the original writer is to blame for such a mistaken application of the unit.
*
The math was done.  The numbers that were found do not line with actual showings of the effects of the "White Sound Cannon" _*AT ALL. 
*_


Tonathan100 said:


> They said "more than a thousand" universes, which doesn't contradict the term "infinite".



I know there is a fallacy somewhere in your argument, and I know it is a misappropriation of "infinite".

And it is not simply "more than a thousand" that is only used.  There are multiple cases of "a thousand Universe" being said to have been destroyed.  A notable one being from Issue 12, the final one in the series.  Here is the quote, *word for word*:

*"*Welcome to the Antimatter universe...Welcome to your doom!  Since my birth ten billion years ago, I have not known defeat.  *A thousand Universes before yours perished without resistance*.  But you refused to die.  I was to enlarge my Antimatter Universe, to have it replaced all others...*A thousand meaningless victories because you resisted my efforts to destroy you*.  One universe...Protected by one small and terribly insignificant little world."

Again, Anti-Monitor is the one who destroyed those Universes.  He would know how how many Universes he has destroyed.

And yes, those numbers would contradict "infinite", because saying "a thousand Universes before yours perished"* indicates a finite set.  
*
You have no proof that the number of Universes destroyed was "infinite".  You cannot just throw out multiple statements pertaining to a set number of Universe that were described as destroyed, simply because it does not agree with your Crusade of "Make DC Comics Great Again" that you've been on ever since Dragon Ball Super started airing.



Blocky said:


> I guess the USS Enterprise is megaversal level if we go by ton's logic..
> 
> Such a genius, am I right?



Not just genius, but it also makes Star Trek "The Most Powerful Universe" in all of fiction by virtue of having the highest known quantifiable feat.


----------



## Toaa (Oct 16, 2016)

....tonathan just stahp 

You cant do math and you cant even bring a reasonable argument


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 16, 2016)

Fang said:


> Not a fallacious usage on my part.


Yes, it is.



> For someone like you, its necessary to repeat myself.


No, it isn't.



> Parroting isn't working for you either.


Yes, it is.




> You're as bad at English as you are at mathematics. More than a thousand is still finite, this is textbook stuff.


You do realize that infinity is more than one thousand, right? Again, basic mathematics.



> You also contradict yourself by applying a defined quantity with an unknown one which does not work with set numbers with cardinality.
> 
> You just look worse with every post you make.


Due to the fact that it was stated multiple times that the Pre-Crisis DC Comics multiverse, by both Alexander Luthor Jr. and the omniscient narrator, was infinite, I can easily say that the "more than one thousand" statements actually refer to infinite universes.



> You didn't.


I did.



Catalyst75 said:


> 1. Condensed/compressed energy *would just make it that much easier to do that.
> *
> 2. In this situation, that is not the case because the statement is inherently flawed, *and the original writer is to blame for such a mistaken application of the unit.
> *
> The math was done.  The numbers that were found do not line with actual showings of the effects of the "White Sound Cannon" *AT ALL. *


1. Again, chalk it up to ignorance of the environmental effects required of attacks with such energy. Otherwise, I can just as easily claim that no one in Dragon Ball is beyond Planet Level because they don't create black holes when they compress/condense their energy.
2. You are going off of author's intent, one which is entirely unknown by the way, to disregard this feat.

No. There is a reason that we disregard author's intent in most cases in the OBD.



> I know there is a fallacy somewhere in your argument, and I know it is a misappropriation of "infinite".
> 
> And it is not simply "more than a thousand" that is only used.  There are multiple cases of "a thousand Universe" being said to have been destroyed.  A notable one being from Issue 12, the final one in the series.  Here is the quote, *word for word*:
> 
> ...


It's called a figure of speech. One that is already contradicted when the Monitor said "*more than* a thousand universes" *already* died in Crisis On Infinite Earths #2, the Anti-Monitor himself saying that "a thousand universes *and more*" have died because of him in Crisis On Infinite Earths #8, and the Anti-Monitor absorbing the energy of "more than one million" universes in the same issue. The Anti-Monitor was simply making a grandiose speech to scare the heroes into surrendering, and the "a thousand universes" statement was merely a figure of speech used as a scare tactic. 



> You have no proof that the number of Universes destroyed was "infinite".  You cannot just throw out multiple statements pertaining to a set number of Universe that were described as destroyed, simply because it does not agree with your Crusade of "Make DC Comics Great Again" that you've been on ever since Dragon Ball Super started airing.





The statements of infinite universes were stated by Alexander Luthor Jr. and the omniscient narrator, both in completely serious tones, so they cannot simply be thrown away as mere figures of speech.


----------



## Fang (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> *snip*


----------



## Fang (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


>





>refuted
>moves the goal posts and backpedaling

It must be the lack of having a high school education that entitles you into thinking being so wrong makes you right.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 16, 2016)

Fang said:


> >refuted
> >moves the goal posts and backpedaling


Show me where I backpedalled and moved the goalposts.



> It must be the lack of having a high school education that entitles you into thinking being so wrong makes you right.


I'm in the 11th grade, prick.


----------



## Fang (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Show me where I backpedalled and moved the goalposts.



Every single post you made in this thread replying to yours.



> I'm in the 11th grade, prick.



Highly doubtful.


----------



## Toaa (Oct 16, 2016)

Fang said:


> Highly doubtful




Completelly irellevant but how did you change the color?


----------



## Fang (Oct 16, 2016)

Change the color of what?


----------



## Toaa (Oct 16, 2016)

Um all of the site mine is the default white


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> The statements of infinite universes were stated by Alexander Luthor Jr. and the omniscient narrator, both in completely serious tones, so they cannot simply be thrown away as mere figures of speech.



About that...

The first issue describes it as a "single, black infinitude".  Since that was when Krona looked back in time and caused the Multiverse to form in the first place, you can't apply that "infinitude" to the number of Multiverses created.

BTW, go check up on Emperorofliberty.  He claims that Cosmic Armor Superman is not multiversal, says Mandrakk being able to "devour story" is meaningless, and that he is not "massively multiverse".

Assuming that he is not you on an alternate account, of course.  Your debate styles are mirror images of one another, so we find it hard to tell.


----------



## BreakFlame (Oct 16, 2016)

Good god, imagine the salt if we could get Ton and Emperor to go at it.


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 16, 2016)

I'm still waiting on Ton VS. FTDS, Superman vs Naruto.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 16, 2016)

Fang said:


> Every single post you made in this thread replying to yours.


Proof? Specific examples?



> Highly doubtful.


It being "highly doubtful", of course, mainly because you say so. 



Catalyst75 said:


> About that...
> 
> The first issue describes it as a "single, black infinitude".  Since that was when Krona looked back in time and caused the Multiverse to form in the first place, you can't apply that "infinitude" to the number of Multiverses created.




The "single, black infinitude" is obviously Monitor-Mind the Overvoid, a completely different "infinitude" than the "multiversal infinitude" described in this scan.





> BTW, go check up on Emperorofliberty.  He claims that Cosmic Armor Superman is not multiversal, says Mandrakk being able to "devour story" is meaningless, and that he is not "massively multiverse".


Relevant threads, please?



> Assuming that he is not you on an alternate account, of course.  Your debate styles are mirror images of one another, so we find it hard to tell.


Ummm...no. Do you honestly believe that the mods wouldn't have found out already if he was me on an alternative account?


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 16, 2016)

Odd that you show up right as he gets banned

I bet it's not related at all

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Hardboned (Oct 16, 2016)

Ikki solos the end I'm out


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> The "single, black infinitude" is obviously Monitor-Mind the Overvoid, a completely different "infinitude" than the "multiversal infinitude" described in this scan.



No.

The Overmonitor only came upon the DCU when it was a Multiverse; but before it was a Multiverse, it was only a single Universe.  Krona is the one responsible for Creation retroactively splitting up into a Multiverse, and the proof can be seen in that Oa is a singular existence in the Multiverse.

Both Monitors arrived in the Universe and Antimatter universe 10 Billion Years ago, when Krona's experiment caused the creation of the Multiverse.  According to "Final Crisis", the Overmonitor was unaware of the Multiverse before stumbling upon it by chance, and it was then that it sent the Monitor probe.


----------



## saint rider 890 (Oct 16, 2016)

XImpossibruX said:


> I'm still waiting on Ton VS. FTDS, Superman vs Naruto.



What about Tonathan100 vs Emperorofliberty ?


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 16, 2016)

saint rider 890 said:


> What about Tonathan100 vs Emperorofliberty ?



Emperorofliberty got his liberty rescinded - he got banned from the forum.


----------



## Fang (Oct 16, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Proof? Specific examples?



Every post you make. : ^ )



> It being "highly doubtful", of course, mainly because you say so.



My word is a lot more credible then yours after all so yep.



> Ummm...no. Do you honestly believe that the mods wouldn't have found out already if he was me on an alternative account?



>What is a VPN


----------



## shade0180 (Oct 16, 2016)

Seriously, How much pull does Tonathan have in NF that he still isn't banned to this day?

 


Tonathan100 said:


> Ummm...no. Do you honestly believe that the mods wouldn't have found out already if he was me on an alternative account?



VPN 
 even grade-school student can practically use them nowadays.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 17, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> No.
> 
> The Overmonitor only came upon the DCU when it was a Multiverse; but before it was a Multiverse, it was only a single Universe.  Krona is the one responsible for Creation retroactively splitting up into a Multiverse, and the proof can be seen in that Oa is a singular existence in the Multiverse.
> 
> Both Monitors arrived in the Universe and Antimatter universe 10 Billion Years ago, when Krona's experiment caused the creation of the Multiverse.  According to "Final Crisis", the Overmonitor was unaware of the Multiverse before stumbling upon it by chance, and it was then that it sent the Monitor probe.


And this proves that the "multiversal infinitude" is Monitor-Mind the Overvoid how?



Fang said:


> Every post you make. : ^ )


So you don't have proof or specific examples? 




> My word is a lot more credible then yours after all so yep.


By what standard? Either way, I don't really have to prove any credentials I state to have *on the internet* unless I use them to appeal to my own authority, which I never do.



> >What is a VPN


I'm not using that to dupe either.


----------



## Fang (Oct 17, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> So you don't have proof or specific examples?



Every post you've made before, reading helps.



> *non sequitur*



Not how it works but you've proven you've consistently lied, contradict yourself, move the goal posts, have an ulterior motives repeatedly, and a history of consistent backpedaling; and for reference the entire Superman thread you made being the penultimate nail in the coffin for you here. You have no credibility.



> I'm not using that to dupe either.



Not taking your word for it.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 17, 2016)

Fang said:


> Every post you've made before, reading helps.


Nice job bringing up no proof or evidence.




> Not how it works but you've proven you've consistently lied, contradict yourself, move the goal posts, have an ulterior motives repeatedly, and a history of consistent backpedaling; and for reference the entire Superman thread you made being the penultimate nail in the coffin for you here. You have no credibility.


I didn't lie, contradict myself, move the goalposts, or backpedal during the entire Superman thread. I only stated my motive for doing it, which was to show that Superman can still beat Son Goku.




> Not taking your word for it.


I don't care. The fact that I'm not banned should easily be proof enough.


----------



## Fang (Oct 17, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Nice job bringing up no proof or evidence.



Thread's there still, kiddo.



> I lie, contradict myself, move the goalposts, or backpedal during the entire Superman thread. I only lied my motive for doing it in several posts, which was to show that Superman can still beat Son Goku which the thread proved he can't.



Exactly.



> I don't care. The fact that I'm not banned should easily be proof enough.



That's the beauty of VPNs and TOR duping.


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 17, 2016)

"I didn't lie during the superman thread despite no less than 3 posters tearing into me for lying, omitting context and wanking up feats past their actual values"

Oh man this is comedy gold right now.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 17, 2016)

That moment when you realize that this all comes back around to Goku


----------



## Nep Heart (Oct 17, 2016)

@XImpossibruX 

The answer is simple. It's Goku Time all the time. Goku Time transcends time itself, therefore, Superman by extension.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 17, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> And this proves that the "multiversal infinitude" is Monitor-Mind the Overvoid how?



Don't you mean "is not the multi-versal infinitude"?

Because the Over-Monitor, according to the cosmology, exists beyond the sphere of the DC Multiverse.  The Monitor Sphere is above the Multiverse; the God Sphere is above the Multiverse.  Everything within the Orrery of Worlds is the Multiverse in its various stages throughout continuity.  

We know that Darkseid and higher beings like him, like the Anti-Monitor (Mobuis) and Mettatron, are all not affected by the changes to the Universe that take place in the Orrery of Worlds, since they all remember all the previous iterations of the Universes.  

So, the "infinitude" most likely refers to the "Universe/Multiverse".


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 18, 2016)

Fang said:


> Thread's there still, kiddo.


And it doesn't prove anything.




> Exactly.


I would edit your post to say what I think of you as well, but I'm not nearly as immature.




> That's the beauty of VPNs and TOR duping.


You still cannot prove that I did it.



Catalyst75 said:


> Don't you mean "is not the multi-versal infinitude"?
> 
> Because the Over-Monitor, according to the cosmology, exists beyond the sphere of the DC Multiverse.  The Monitor Sphere is above the Multiverse; the God Sphere is above the Multiverse.  Everything within the Orrery of Worlds is the Multiverse in its various stages throughout continuity.
> 
> ...


Nice job stating and proving my point in your own post. The "multiversal infinitude" referred to in Crisis On Infinite Earths is simply the Pre-Crisis On Infinite Earths Orrery of Worlds/Local Multiverse. It shouldn't even be a debate at this point.



GiveRobert20dollars said:


> "I didn't lie during the superman thread despite no less than 3 posters tearing into me for lying, omitting context and wanking up feats past their actual values"
> 
> Oh man this is comedy gold right now.


I didn't lie, omit context, or wank any feat in that thread.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Fang (Oct 18, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> And it doesn't prove anything.



It proves everything, kiddo. More then a half dozen people with knowledge of DC ripped you a new one. And Its the same reason why your stuck on arguing ad naseum the same shit over and over again on three or four different VS sites over nonsense and have your thread making abilities restricted here. No one is buying your bullshit.



> I would edit your post to say what I think of you as well, but I'm not nearly as immature.



Yes, you're obviously mature enough to attempt to doxx people though.



> You still cannot prove that I did it.



Already did.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Blocky (Oct 18, 2016)

So is this thread gonna get locked yet? I'm seeing things that keeps going around a circle here and it looks like it never gonna end.


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 18, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:
			
		

> *insert more lies here*

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 2


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 18, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Nice job stating and proving my point in your own post. The "multiversal infinitude" referred to in Crisis On Infinite Earths is simply the Pre-Crisis On Infinite Earths Orrery of Worlds/Local Multiverse. It shouldn't even be a debate at this point.





> The "single, black infinitude" is _*obviously*_ Monitor-Mind the Overvoid, a completely different "infinitude" than the "multiversal infinitude" described in this scan.



Emphasis mine. 

No, I did not prove your point.  Your original point was that the "single, black infinitude" was "obviously" Monitor-Mind.  I guess what I said at the end of my post was too subtle for a failed Sophist to comprehend: 

*The infinitude.  Is the same.  Between the two.
*
The "single, black infinitude" at the beginning of Crisis is the same thing as the "multiversal infinitude" from the end of Crisis.  

 "Everything within the Orrery of Worlds is the Multiverse _in its various stages throughout continuity_*" includes the Universe as it was before Krona looked at the beginning of time*.  Krona's action caused the Universe to turn into a Multiverse.  It was only when it became a Multiverse that the Overmonitor ever noticed the DCU existed in the first place.

"The "Single, black Infinitude" represents the Universe before Krona looked back at the beginning of time; "the multiversal infinitude" refers to the act of the existence of the Multiverse being undone, and everything collapsing back into one Universe as a result of Spectre's clash with the Anti-Monitor.

They are both the same, and neither one is some kind of completely separate entity.


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 18, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> I didn't lie, omit context, or wank any feat in that thread.


you say this all the time, and every time you do, people prove you wrong


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 18, 2016)

Fang said:


> It proves everything, kiddo. More then a half dozen people with knowledge of DC ripped you a new one. And Its the same reason why your stuck on arguing ad naseum the same shit over and over again on three or four different VS sites over nonsense and have your thread making abilities restricted here. No one is buying your bullshit.


I never had my thread creating abilities restricted in the Outskirts Battledome.




> Yes, you're obviously mature enough to attempt to doxx people though.


Doxxing has nothing to do with maturity.




> Already did.


Then where is the proof?



Catalyst75 said:


> Emphasis mine.
> 
> No, I did not prove your point.  Your original point was that the "single, black infinitude" was "obviously" Monitor-Mind.  I guess what I said at the end of my post was too subtle for a failed Sophist to comprehend:
> 
> ...


The level of reaching here is incredible. Why would any sane sentient being refer to a *universe* as a "single, black, infinitude"? The "black infinitude" would obviously be the void surrounding the universe/multiverse/creation. The "multiversal infinitude" would obviously be the multiverse/creation itself.


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 18, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> I never had my thread creating abilities restricted in the Outskirts Battledome


we all know this is a lie. Like, this is so fucking blatent you might as well have a flashing neon sign around this part that says "i cant stop lying, watch me pull shit out my ass and inflate superman so he can beat Goku"


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 18, 2016)

OneSimpleAnime said:


> we all know this is a lie. Like, this is so fucking blatent you might as well have a flashing neon sign around this part that says "i cant stop lying, watch me pull shit out my ass and inflate superman so he can beat Goku"


If I had my thread creation abilities restricted or removed, then why can I make this very thread?


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 18, 2016)

October 4th was 2 days after the superman thread ended, and there isnt another thread by you in the last 5-6 pages in the OBD, but before the superman thread you made threads nearly every other day


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 18, 2016)

And if you seriously havent had your thread making rights taken away, the mods are inept


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 18, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> The level of reaching here is incredible. Why would any sane sentient being refer to a *universe* as a "single, black, infinitude"? The "black infinitude" would obviously be the void surrounding the universe/multiverse/creation. The "multiversal infinitude" would obviously be the multiverse/creation itself.



Yet both are "so dark and cold for so very long".

Just how long are you going to keep this up?  When Krona looked back in time, a Universe that was once only one, "a single, black infinitude" was forced to split apart at the very beginning of creation, *creating the Multiverse.* 

*Then*, when the Spectre clashed with the Anti-Monitor, the Multiverse, "a multiversal infinitude", *returned back to a single Universe*.

Do you really not get it?  Krona changed the beginning of the Universe the first time around when he first peered back.  It was changed a second time when the Anti-Monitor and Spectre clashed.

I'm not reaching for anything here.  I'd argue that you are the one who is reaching, by trying to claim that the two "infinitude" are somehow completely separate from one another - that one "has to be the Overmonitor", but that the other is "only" the Orrery of Worlds.


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> I never had my thread creating abilities restricted in the Outskirts Battledome.



Go ahead and make a new thread then.



> Doxxing has nothing to do with maturity.



Thanks for the lack of reading comprehension, but yes it does. Who else but a petulant child makes obstinate claims that get rebuked and refuted, then attempts to access others personal information to harass and attack them? Not a rational or mature person. Ergo you are not mature, you are a wannabe script kiddie, and you threw a tantrum over everyone gutting your nonsense. You are transparent and we all see through your childish behavior.

This is why we know about your past antics from other VS sites.



> Then where is the proof?



There, here, everywhere kiddo.

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## XImpossibruX (Oct 19, 2016)

Fang said:


> Who else but a petulant child makes obstinate claims that get rebuked and refuted, then attempts to access others personal information to harass and attack them? Not a rational or mature person. Ergo you are not mature, you are a wannabe script kiddie,



Wait, Tonny tried to hack someone over a vs debate?


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

He went after some other dude's personal information and was calling their home or something like that.


----------



## OneSimpleAnime (Oct 19, 2016)

Fang said:


> He went after some other dude's personal information and was calling their home or something like that.


for real


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 19, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Yet both are "so dark and cold for so very long".


In the second scan, that was only because the multiverse was being reduced to a single universe.



"...but then the light grew, and the multiverse shuddered..."

"...for in that instant, a universe was born..."



> Just how long are you going to keep this up?  When Krona looked back in time, a Universe that was once only one, "a single, black infinitude" was forced to split apart at the very beginning of creation, *creating the Multiverse.*


You still haven't answered why a universe would be referred to as a "single, black infinitude".



> *Then*, when the Spectre clashed with the Anti-Monitor, the Multiverse, "a multiversal infinitude", *returned back to a single Universe*.
> 
> Do you really not get it?  Krona changed the beginning of the Universe the first time around when he first peered back.  It was changed a second time when the Anti-Monitor and Spectre clashed.
> 
> I'm not reaching for anything here.  I'd argue that you are the one who is reaching, by trying to claim that the two "infinitude" are somehow completely separate from one another - that one "has to be the Overmonitor", but that the other is "only" the Orrery of Worlds.


The "black infinitude", as it clearly *doesn't* refer to a universe, could refer to literally nothing else but the *black void* surrounding the light of the Big Bang, which is Monitor-Mind the Overvoid. The "multiversal infinitude", as it refers to a multiverse specifically, could refer to literally nothing else but the Pre-Crisis DC Comics multiverse. How do you not get this?



Fang said:


> Go ahead and make a new thread then.


After this one, I will.




> Thanks for the lack of reading comprehension, but yes it does. Who else but a petulant child makes obstinate claims that get rebuked and refuted, then attempts to access others personal information to harass and attack them? Not a rational or mature person. Ergo you are not mature, you are a wannabe script kiddie, and you threw a tantrum over everyone gutting your nonsense. You are transparent and we all see through your childish behavior.
> 
> This is why we know about your past antics from other VS sites.


I never tried to access the personal information of others because I was rebuked or refuted, so your argument fails right there.




> There, here, everywhere kiddo.


So basically none?

Reactions: Like 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> After this one, I will.



I'll be waiting.



> I never tried to access the personal information of others because I was rebuked or refuted, so your argument fails right there.



Not according to the posters from those sites, so nope.



> So basically none?



Nope.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 19, 2016)

Fang said:


> I'll be waiting.


Okay...




> Not according to the posters from those sites, so nope.


Then they're lying.




> Nope.


Admitting that you don't have any evidence? Good.


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Okay...



Still waiting.



> Then they're lying.



Signs point to no, kiddo.



> Admitting that you don't have any evidence? Good.



That's not an admission to what your trying to draw there, strawman kun. Protip again: you are not a capable debater or smart enough to deflect from the fact that all the evidence is right there in that thread.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 19, 2016)

Fang said:


> Still waiting.


I said I'll create one when I'm done with *this thread*. Can you read?




> Signs point to no, kiddo.


What signs?




> That's not an admission to what your trying to draw there, strawman kun. Protip again: you are not a capable debater or smart enough to deflect from the fact that all the evidence is right there in that thread.


Then show the evidence, then.


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> I said I'll create one when I'm done with *this thread*. Can you read?





			
				Tonathan100 said:
			
		

> I never had my thread creating abilities restricted in the Outskirts Battledome



You can't even remember the post you made a day ago that was a simple one liner, how pathetic.



> What signs?







> Then show the evidence, then.



Threads are there in plain sight.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 19, 2016)

Fang said:


> You can't even remember the post you made a day ago that was a simple one liner, how pathetic.


Since you are apparently retarded.



> After this one, I will.



Again, what signs?



> Threads are there in plain sight.


And? Provide specific quotes of me being as terrible a debater as you claim.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> Since you are apparently retarded.



Oh?



> Again, what signs?



Aforementioned ones.



> And? Provide specific quotes of me being as terrible a debater as you claim.



You've been already doing that the last 2 months on your own just fine already. The Superman thread is still up too.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 19, 2016)

Fang said:


> Oh?


Yes. Not only are you incapable of reading, but you never back up your points and you always shift the burden of proof.




> Aforementioned ones.


Show the signs, then.




> You've been already doing that the last 2 months on your own just fine already. The Superman thread is still up too.


Stop dodging the request. I said provide specific quotes, and you aren't doing that, so you're just bullshitting.


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> *snip*


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 19, 2016)

I'm guessing that since you only posted an image/GIF, then you have conceded the argument. In that case, concession accepted.


----------



## Fang (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> *snip*.





You've gotten worse then Phenomenal and this is boring me. Onto ignore you go.


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 19, 2016)

Tonathan100 said:


> The "black infinitude", as it clearly *doesn't* refer to a universe, could refer to literally nothing else but the *black void* surrounding the light of the Big Bang, which is Monitor-Mind the Overvoid. The "multiversal infinitude", as it refers to a multiverse specifically, could refer to literally nothing else but the Pre-Crisis DC Comics multiverse. How do you not get this?



Because I get that, before Krona looked back to the beginning of time, *THERE WAS ONLY ONE UNIVERSE.
*
I believe I explained this before: Krona looked back, and that caused the Multiverse to be born from *a single Universe.  
*
Either way, the thread is long past its expiration date:

Amatsu-Mikaboshi is more powerful than the Anti-Monitor and wins the battle.

Now let the discussion die.


----------



## Tonathan100 (Oct 21, 2016)

Catalyst75 said:


> Because I get that, before Krona looked back to the beginning of time, *THERE WAS ONLY ONE UNIVERSE.
> *
> I believe I explained this before: Krona looked back, and that caused the Multiverse to be born from *a single Universe. *


And this disproves anything that I just said in that post how?



> Either way, the thread is long past its expiration date:
> 
> Amatsu-Mikaboshi is more powerful than the Anti-Monitor and wins the battle.
> 
> Now let the discussion die.


Nope. The Anti-Monitor destroyed nearly the totality of an infinite multiverse. Amatsu-Mikaboshi "only" destroyed 98% of an infinite multiverse. Therefore, the Anti-Monitor wins.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## GiveRobert20dollars (Oct 21, 2016)

No one cares, tonathan.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Catalyst75 (Oct 21, 2016)

GiveRobert20dollars said:


> No one cares, tonathan.



Damn straight. 



Tonathan100 said:


> Nope. The Anti-Monitor destroyed nearly the totality of an infinite multiverse. Amatsu-Mikaboshi "only" destroyed 98% of an infinite multiverse. Therefore, the Anti-Monitor wins.



I swear, between you and Emperorofliberty (if you are not the same person, then cut from the same cloth), the both of you are doing nothing but proving just how ludicrous the idea of "infinite" of anything actually is.

It is either this, or you just cannot accept the possibility that DC may not be as powerful as you want it to be for the sake of your fantasy Superman.


----------



## Blocky (Oct 21, 2016)

I'm surprised the mods didn't close this yet.


----------



## TheManWhoLaughs (Mar 12, 2017)

Antimonitor stomps


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Mar 12, 2017)

Did we not just have this discussion on how necroing threads is not appropriate?


----------

