# Galactus vs The Q



## SpaceMook (Apr 28, 2011)

Can he do it? Decently fed Galactus with the UN.

Scenario 2: Fully Fed Galactus.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 28, 2011)

At their highest, they're all omnipotent. At their lowest, they simply have limitless reality warping abilities. So I see no reason why they couldn't nullify the Ultimate Nullifier, or make it turn on Galactus instead.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> At their highest, they're all omnipotent. At their lowest, they simply have limitless reality warping abilities. So I see no reason why they couldn't nullify the Ultimate Nullifier, or make it turn on Galactus instead.



Except they have no feats putting them anywhere near Big G 

Hell, Thor routinely does more impressive stuff than what they normally do.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> At their highest, they're all omnipotent.



And how is there supposed to exist more than one omnipotent in a verse again?


----------



## Velocity (Apr 28, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Except they have no feats putting them anywhere near Big G
> 
> Hell, Thor routinely does more impressive stuff than what they normally do.



One of them alone can stop death, create life, travel through time, stop time and create entire worlds  effortlessly. Oh, and they can give others that power. In fact, the only limit on a Q's power is the inability to overcome the powers of another Q. How does Thor do _anything_ more impressive than that?

Oh wait, no, sorry. I completely forgot. When it comes to the OBD, Marvel always wins.

*Black Leg Sanji:* Er... Why don't you prove that there can't be more than one omnipotent being in a single universe?


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

^That is a joke to Galactus even Cubed beings are universal. There cannot be more than one omnipotent and unless they have feats of stopping something that is multiversal in power like the UN, no they cannot do anything to it.


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> *Black Leg Sanji:* Er... Why don't you prove that there can't be more than one omnipotent being in a single universe?



An omnipotent can do anything. If one Q can be stopped by another, they have limits and are thus not omnipotent.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 28, 2011)

I didnt make the claim that there was more than one omnipotent in a universe

You did, thus the burden of proof is on you

Edit: Thanks TF and Eldritch for saving me the trouble of typing an extra sentence


----------



## Velocity (Apr 28, 2011)

Eldritch Sukima said:


> An omnipotent can do anything. If one Q can be stopped by another, they have limits and are thus not omnipotent.



Ugh, don't you _read_? The only thing a Q cannot do is overcome the powers of another Q. Besides, I clearly pointed out that - if you don't want to consider them omnipotent - they're still limitless reality warpers.

But meh... I should've known not to get involved in a thread about Galactus. The wank for that guy is just obscene. Has he ever actually lost a match here, ever?


----------



## Fang (Apr 28, 2011)

A Cosmic Cube Being is "limitless" as a reality warper.

Any number of them get stomped by a Celestial. A Celestial is not on the level of an Abstract, a nominal Abstract is not on the level of a multiversal being like Eternity, Galactus, Death, Oblivion, etc.

They are not omnipotent and The Q straight up stated in Voyager at one point that Humans WILL surprass them eventually. So noooooooooooooope.


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> Ugh, don't you _read_? The only thing a Q cannot do is overcome the powers of another Q.



Which means they can't possibly be omnipotent. An omnipotent has no equals.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> The wank for that guy is just obscene. Has he ever actually lost a match here, ever?



His wank is so bad that he has actually lost several matches


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> Ugh, don't you _read_? The only thing a Q cannot do is overcome the powers of another Q. Besides, I clearly pointed out that - if you don't want to consider them omnipotent - they're still limitless reality warpers.
> 
> But meh... I should've known not to get involved in a thread about Galactus. The wank for that guy is just obscene. Has he ever actually lost a match here, ever?



Then if they have limits they aren't omnipotent. You can't be Omnipotent if there is something you can't do.

How is this Galactus wank, your the one trying to pass off the Q as all powerful.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 28, 2011)

Just curious

Arent the Q's Galactic-level at best?

Edit: Good to see you are still with us Emperor Joker (Assuming you live in Alabama)


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

Galactus of course wins with being an Abstract that can wipe out multiverses.

I guess this thread all the more proves that anyone can become a moderator.


----------



## SpaceMook (Apr 28, 2011)

Going to play devils advocate, despite me not wanting to.

Q goes back in time and destroys Galactus before he hatches from the Cosmic Egg. 

And on that note has Galactus shown any defense against attacks on his past? I know SS can actually Time Travel and Galactus has every single ability of his Heralds. So he should have some counter measures against this sort of attacks.

Q will lose in a straight up fight, Galactus will bitch slap them.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 28, 2011)

Black Leg Sanji said:


> His wank is so bad that he has actually lost several matches



The funniest one? He lost to Mad Jim Jaspers apparently and that guy is about as strong as any single Q. So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?



Emperor Joker said:


> Then if they have limits they aren't  omnipotent. You can't be Omnipotent if there is something you can't do.
> 
> How is this Galactus wank, your the one trying to pass off the Q as all powerful.



They're _called_ omnipotent in Star Trek. I'm not trying to pass off anything. I'm just getting a bunch of people telling me that obviously the writers don't know what they're talking about and therefore everything is to be ignored. Which is retarded.


----------



## Wolfgang Grimmer (Apr 28, 2011)

MJJ is a potential Omni-verse threat. Just saiyan


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?



The general consensus was that Tsunami would crush Galactus, and he's apparently lost to Zeed as well, so no.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?



There are several other multiversal characters in other media and a few Omnipotents

So not really


----------



## Velocity (Apr 28, 2011)

Kirihara said:


> MJJ is a potential Omni-verse threat. Just saiyan



He's a limitless reality warper, just like any Q. What's the difference?

Or is it simply that Marvel has an omniverse and Star Trek doesn't, therefore the Q are automatically weaker just because their continuity isn't as fucked up as Marvels and doesn't need arse-pulls like that?


----------



## Fang (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> The funniest one? He lost to Mad Jim Jaspers apparently and that guy is about as strong as any single Q. So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?



Except for the fact that MJJ has feats that trump anything all of the Q put together times a thousand fold.



> They're _called_ omnipotent in Star Trek.



No one cares what their called.



> I'm not trying to pass off anything.



And yet you are here, forcing it.



> I'm just getting a bunch of people telling me that obviously the writers don't know what they're talking about and therefore everything is to be ignored. Which is retarded.



See above. Funnily enough I like how I remember in both TNG and Voyager how the Q have never displayed even galaxy ranging reality warping yet fucking toddler Franklin Richards can create a baby universe and he's nothing to Galactus.


----------



## Wolfgang Grimmer (Apr 28, 2011)

Because merlyn who guards the omniverse at that time deemed MJJ a threat


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

Winny said:


> The funniest one? He lost to Mad Jim Jaspers apparently and that guy is about as strong as any single Q. So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?
> 
> 
> 
> They're _called_ omnipotent in Star Trek. I'm not trying to pass off anything. I'm just getting a bunch of people telling me that obviously the writers don't know what they're talking about and therefore everything is to be ignored. Which is retarded.



But that's impossible for an entire species to be omnipotent..and if they do have limits then they can't fit the definition of the word Omnipotent in the first pace (All Powerful)


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

Galactus's bio calls him a universal threat while calling Fallen one a Galactic one for his ability to manipulate black matter which keeps Galaxies solvent. 



Offcourse they're just bios, galaxy level Herald seems strange anyway.

Johnny states Galactus is a being he has trouble comprehending as mere human. Also


Link removed

I could post scans of Galactus healing eternity an abstract, fighting Mephisto in his own realm, erasing a universe from existence etc. Galactus is not a true abstract since there is no such thing as Galactus when you have concepts like Love, Death, Eternity but Galactus's UN which is multiversal has been retconned as part of him making him Multiversal.


----------



## masamune1 (Apr 28, 2011)

SpaceMook said:


> And on that note has Galactus shown any defense against attacks on his past? I know SS can actually Time Travel and Galactus has every single ability of his Heralds. So he should have some counter measures against this sort of attacks.



The rules governing time-travel in the Marvel-verse (which aren't always obeyed) basically state that if anyone did something like that, then they would only create an alternate timeline. So he doesn't really need one.

Plus, his past is...complicated. In a manner of speaking, there has _always_ been a Galactus.


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

masamune1 said:


> The rules governing time-travel in the Marvel-verse (which aren't always obeyed) basically state that if anyone did something like that, then they would only create an alternate timeline. So he doesn't really need one.
> 
> Plus, his past is...complicated. In a manner of speaking, there has _always_ been a Galactus.



Let's also take into account that even if it didn't diverge into a alternate timeline by going back in time and killing him it would probably release Abraxas...whoopsee


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

Yeah abrasax who could screw with the barriers between dimensions that the real Galactus pwned. Omnipotent can either mean really powerful or supreme being, can't be the latter if all of them are called omnipotent. Galactus can do most of that stuff if not all of it except time travel but I'll have to check that again.

Here's the universe erasing feat:


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

1.Galactus isn't multiversal and if you want to take his supposed assertion that the UN is a part of him you also have to accept the fact that he can lose it just as easily as shown in the same story that your referencing. 

As for the Q I mean if you want to downplay even lower then Galactus' level by mentioning character A is an abstract and powerscaling off of that then thats stupid.

The entire Q race as a whole have feats that would be enough to give Galactus a good fight. Bitching about the use of the word omnipotent in another fictional universe that has different standards then Marvel isn't furthering anyone's point.
2. Theres not such thing as a full fed galactus its just an excuse his overzealous fans like to claim to excuse any loss hes ever had.


----------



## Vault (Apr 28, 2011)

I love these galactus threads.


----------



## Ky Hakubi (Apr 28, 2011)

The Q Continuum did strip Q's powers away in an episode of TNG, leaving him completely human. Would that qualify for overcoming a Q's powers?


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> 1.Galactus isn't multiversal and if you want to take his supposed assertion that the UN is a part of him you also have to accept the fact that he can lose it just as easily as shown in the same story that your referencing.


Wrong again Matta Clatta. You've already been shown scans of Galactus teleporting said weapon out of the hands of Abraxas, something no one else has ever shown to do, and using said weapon to great enough extent to piss off the guys who organize the omniverse.


> As for the Q I mean if you want to downplay even lower then Galactus' level by mentioning character A is an abstract and powerscaling off of that then thats stupid.


It's not a downplay when Q quite simply lacks feats.


> The entire Q race as a whole have feats that would be enough to give Galactus a good fight.


Such as what? They haven't done anything that comes close to Abstract level.


> Bitching about the use of the word omnipotent in another fictional universe that has different standards then Marvel isn't furthering anyone's point.


We can complain about it when the usage of said term is limited to a weak character statement by a character that constantly enjoys being a narcissistic snark.


> 2. Theres not such thing as a full fed galactus its just an excuse his overzealous fans like to claim to excuse any loss hes ever had.


Because you know so much about Galactus.


----------



## Vault (Apr 28, 2011)

> Because you know so much about Comics.



Fixed  

His knowledge in comics is shockingly lacking yet he always tries to argue.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

The UN can be taken away just as easily as Galactus can take it back


We don't accept claims of omnipotence when it involves an entire race other than it meaning "very powerful", Marvel did not invent the concept of omnipotence it has always been one supreme being/God. The latter defination cannot apply here.


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

If you want to use that story as evidence of Galactus holding complete control over the UN then most of you would need  to stop cherry picking scans from respect threads and actually read the story since someone with complete control over the Nullifier wouldn't end up dropping it into the hands of Reed Richards after said statement about it basically being his heart when he gets attacked.

Now as for a singular Q lacking feats to hurt Galactus I'd believe that but saying the entire species can't hurt him is wank when even Thor throwing Mjolnir has hurt him.


----------



## SpaceMook (Apr 28, 2011)

Anyone have scans of Galactus taking on Magus when he was empowered by 5 other cosmic cubed beings?


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> If you want to use that story as evidence of Galactus holding complete control over the UN then most of you would need  to stop cherry picking scans from respect threads and actually read the story *since someone with complete control over the Nullifier wouldn't end up* dropping it into the hands of Reed Richards after said statement about it basically being his heart when he gets attacked.


It's made pretty clear Galactus simply allowed Reed to use it. We still have feats of Galactus using the UN to an extent and precision that has ever been responded to by the guys who organized the whole Omniverse.


> Now as for a singular Q lacking feats to hurt Galactus I'd believe that but saying the entire species can't hurt him is wank when even Thor throwing Mjolnir has hurt him.



The entire species going to war at best was forcing stars to go supernova. That's not even affecting half a universe, much less an entire galaxy as range goes. Galactus on the other has been a threat to the universe level and beyond.

What about Thor hurting Galactus with a hammer? I can easily enough bring up the numerous times Celestials have utterly made Thor and even Odin crap their pants as far as making their efforts look like a joke.


----------



## KaiserWombat (Apr 28, 2011)

I find the argument of regular humans with no supernatural powers or cosmic awareness calling the Q "omnipotent" in what seems to be a very hyperbole manner to be very lacking

That being said, I think even Marvel/DC's references of omnipotence should be honestly be taken with a grain of salt, given the boundaries of any fiction and the rather liberal usage of the term (the "levels of omnipotence" statement by Kubik springs to mind): after all, isn't the OBD primarily discussing by feats and not intangible statements and hype?

The concept is omnipotence is just incompatible with versus threads because it is not a concept that can be verified by evidence.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

Galactus blatantly states the UN is part him and this is after he takes it away from someone like Abrasax with a mere gesture, he gives it to Reed but if he wishes he could do the same to him. It's not cherry picking scans, Galactus's power varies and I'm fairly certain he was about to feed when that happened with Thor. Galactus's power was at one point stated to be enough to obliterate celestials during the whole black celestial story.

EDIT That was'nt Thor, my bad.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

KaiserWombat said:


> I find the argument of regular humans with no supernatural powers or cosmic awareness calling the Q "omnipotent" in what seems to be a very hyperbole manner to be very lacking
> 
> That being said, I think even Marvel/DC's references of omnipotence should be honestly be taken with a grain of salt, given the boundaries of any fiction and the rather liberal usage of the term (the "levels of omnipotence" statement by Kubik springs to mind): after all, isn't the OBD primarily discussing by feats and not intangible statements and hype?
> 
> The concept is omnipotence is just incompatible with versus threads because it is not a concept that can be verified by evidence.



The issue here for this discussion is that only one side is really attempting to suggest one side wins by being omnipotent. It says a lot when one side brings up feats and such but the other side only brings up a weak statement.


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> It's made pretty clear Galactus simply allowed Reed to use it. We still have feats of Galactus using the UN to an extent and precision that has ever been responded to by the guys who organized the whole Omniverse.


No he didn't allow Reed to use it he dropped after he got attacked and it fell into Reed's hand because they were all fighting for control of the UN. Now if he had compltete control over it you would have to think it wouldn't be an issue anyway. 
I see your once again arguing his ability to use the UN again which is not what I'm talking about and neither is it being called into question anyway.



neodragzero said:


> The entire species going to war at best was forcing stars to go supernova. That's not even affecting half a universe, much less an entire galaxy as range goes. Galactus on the other has been a threat to the universe level and beyond.


A supernova would hurt Galactus and thats beside the point of you basically diverting your argument into Galactus is a force of the universe in Marvel so no attack done by anyone below abstract level should hurt him which is hardly how its presented in the comics.



neodragzero said:


> What about Thor hurting Galactus with a hammer? I can easily enough bring up the numerous times Celestials have utterly made Thor and even Odin crap their pants as far as making their efforts look like a joke.


Celestials>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Galactus so I'm not surprised by that at all.


----------



## Vault (Apr 28, 2011)

Dude stop lying Galactus punks the Celestials.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> No he didn't allow Reed to use it he dropped after he got attacked and it fell into Reed's hand because they were all fighting for control of the UN. Now if he had compltete control over it you would have to think it wouldn't be an issue anyway.


Except that he still allowed Reed to use it. If he didn't want Reed to use he can just as easily yank it away like he did to Abraxas. Galactus doesn't keep the UN all the time but when he clearly wants to take it back, he does. Just because you can stub your toe or have your foot fall asleep doesn't mean it's no longer yours, does it?


> I see your once again arguing his ability to use the UN again which is not what I'm talking about and neither is it being called into question anyway.


It just further shows how connected he is with the UN when he uses it with such an utter ease and precision that also gains the attention of the guys who organize the omniverse.


> A supernova would hurt Galactus


You do realize that high level Skyfathers, Cube Beings, and Celestials are galaxy+ with utter ease, right? Star level stops being impressive quite fast here.


> and thats beside the point of you basically diverting your argument into Galactus is a force of the universe in Marvel so no attack done by anyone below abstract level should hurt him which is hardly how its presented in the comics.


It's incredibly obvious that my point is that Galactus is still above numerous beings with more feats than the Q ever had. We already have the matter of abstracts, celestials, and cube beings explained quite extensively enough. 


> Celestials>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Galactus so I'm not surprised by that at all.



A Celestial is below that of Galactus. This much is obvious with feats and so on that make it quite clear enough that a Celestial isn't Abstract level. Bugger off with the attempt to act like you know what you're talking about.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

A supernova would hurt Galactus? Now this is pretty stupid, the annihilation wave does more than a supernova and Galactus tanked that when not even full powered.


----------



## Cthulhu-versailles (Apr 28, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Except they have no feats putting them anywhere near Big G
> 
> Hell, Thor routinely does more impressive stuff than what they normally do.



Thor is a little bitch.




masamune1 said:


> The rules governing time-travel in the Marvel-verse (which aren't always obeyed) basically state that if anyone did something like that, then they would only create an alternate timeline. So he doesn't really need one.
> 
> Plus, his past is...complicated. In a manner of speaking, there has _always_ been a Galactus.



That's sounds like a cop out. I mean, this isn't a fight against the "infinte" alternate Galactus' from different timelines. It's suppose to be one "Galactus" Vs The Q. Are there any feats for 'Galactus' resisting funky chunky time crunky? As to his past, all I know is he was created at the Big Bang or something like that. Is that right??? If so, The Q can go before the big bang...



Tranquil Fury said:


> Yeah abrasax who could screw with the barriers between dimensions that the real Galactus pwned. Omnipotent can either mean really powerful or supreme being, can't be the latter if all of them are called omnipotent. Galactus can do most of that stuff if not all of it except time travel but I'll have to check that again.
> 
> Here's the universe erasing feat:



I didn't see anything quantifiable in the 2 scans! Universe(s) can differ in size to the point it makes no sense. Is there anything indicating this "erased" universe was as large or larger than our own? Some more context would be nice...



Matta Clatta said:


> 1.Galactus isn't multiversal and if you want to take his supposed assertion that the UN is a part of him you also have to accept the fact that he can lose it just as easily as shown in the same story that your referencing.
> 
> As for the Q I mean if you want to downplay even lower then Galactus' level by mentioning character A is an abstract and powerscaling off of that then thats stupid.
> 
> ...



Also, if you're gonna powerscale one side you gotta do it for the other. In the case of Q you could technically powerscale anything ever shown in Star Trek as something they can do.....:rofl

PS: I thought Eternity and Galactus had strength limited to "one zonky marvel universe" like shown in the Infinity Gaunlet Saga with Thanos. Doesn't each universe have one of them and an M-Body living tribunal? 

Pss:


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

The scans I posted are what they say they are, you don't need more than common sense since the picture and narration state what it is. There is no reason to assume one universe is bigger than another or smaller unless stated otherwise. Can the Q do that? The powerscaling game still goes  to Galactus since he can do everything beings below him can. Between Galactus's own feats throughout the years and those of his heralds he'd have plenty to go with. I posted the bio of Fallen one a former herald as well.

The strongest Galactus is the one who pwned abrasax in the scans I posted with the UN. At full power abstracts are multiversal. Galactus with his UN can do the same.


----------



## Fang (Apr 28, 2011)

I don't know why anyone is even wasting time rebuking or bothering to argue with Matta Clatta. He's proven repeatedly he's absolutely dishonest about the following he's argued on or against consistently, just ignore him.


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> Just because you can stub your toe or have your foot fall asleep doesn't mean it's no longer yours, does it?


Hardly the same thing. If you stub your toe you still have your foot on your body in your possession.
If Galactus gets attacked he loses possesion of the UN which is my point. He doesn't have complete control over it and it can be taken away by force hence him dropping it. I don't care about him allowing Reed to use it the point is he dropped it in the first place which kills your argument.



neodragzero said:


> It just further shows how connected he is with the UN when he uses it with such an utter ease and precision that also gains the attention of the guys who organize the omniverse.


 And  if they attack him he'll drop it and get it taken from him. Yeah that says a lot.





neodragzero said:


> It's incredibly obvious that my point is that Galactus is still above numerous beings with more feats than the Q ever had.


No so far your point is that Galactus is a force of the universe and because of that it takes another force of the universe to harm him which is hilariously weak because although I don't think the Q can win I can sit here and post his low end feats til the point that even one Q could babyshake him. 
For example
Galactus has gotten killed by his space ship blowing up. Multiple Supernova's would be able to murder him a million times over.





neodragzero said:


> A Celestial is below that of Galactus. This much is obvious with feats and so on that make it quite clear enough that a Celestial isn't Abstract level. Bugger off with the attempt to act like you know what you're talking about.


Good thing I said *CELESTIALS* I wasn't talking about one of them and even then you seem to be referring to them as if they all have the same level of power which isn't true. Galactus is stronger then the weakest shown Celestial but thats it.
All Galactus has is that pathetic feat of beating the dreaming celestial with no powers and one story where they say his power is enough to destroy the celestials which isn't backed up by anything on panel at all.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

Galaxy teleportation by Galactus above



Galaxy busting, again not full power.

Doom needed to use a watcher's machine to gain all knowledge they had, a device to use that knowledge, a cosmic cube to reality warp his thoughts and a device to enhance his powers to steal Galactus's power as well.

Plus Annihilus was going to use Galactus's power to destroy a universe, Black celestial to use Galactus as a weapon to create his own reality after killing the other celestials. I'll find the scan where Galactus fights the celestials too if I can.


----------



## KaiserWombat (Apr 28, 2011)

Oh, I am totally on the Big G camp here. I was merely pointing out that the omnipotent argument is a poor one, especially without any truly immense feats

Abstracts are generally off-the-charts powerful even for most cosmological entities, and while Galactus' power does admittedly fluctuate rather widely on occasion, he does have a consistent "average" level to work with: IIRC, it's generally multi-galaxy+ to universe-level. The Ultimate Nullifer rises that up to multiverse+ level, and a theoretical "fully-fed" Galactus would equal his siblings in power...


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Eldritch Sukima said:


> Which means they can't possibly be omnipotent. An omnipotent has no equals.



lol???  they cannot surpass another OMNIPOTENT lmao.



Emperor Joker said:


> Then if they have limits they aren't omnipotent. You can't be Omnipotent if there is something you can't do.
> 
> How is this Galactus wank, your the one trying to pass off the Q as all powerful.



let me ask you how in the world is an omnipotent stronger than an omnipotent? that is what he is trying to say....



Winny said:


> The funniest one? He lost to Mad Jim Jaspers apparently and that guy is about as strong as any single Q. So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?
> 
> 
> 
> They're _called_ omnipotent in Star Trek. I'm not trying to pass off anything. I'm just getting a bunch of people telling me that obviously the writers don't know what they're talking about and therefore everything is to be ignored. Which is retarded.



I think these people are dumb.. you said that the q cannot surpass another q because the other q is omnipotent.. omnipotent always ties with another omnipotent and cannot surpass another omnipotent.



Winny said:


> The funniest one? He lost to Mad Jim Jaspers apparently and that guy is about as strong as any single Q. So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?
> 
> 
> 
> They're _called_ omnipotent in Star Trek. I'm not trying to pass off anything. I'm just getting a bunch of people telling me that obviously the writers don't know what they're talking about and therefore everything is to be ignored. Which is retarded.



I think these people dont know . you said that the q cannot surpass another q because the other q is omnipotent.. omnipotent always ties with another omnipotent and cannot surpass another omnipotent.


----------



## Shock Therapy (Apr 28, 2011)

Galactus stomps a billion times over.

Edit: What the fuck, quadruple post. Ban this kid now


----------



## Vault (Apr 28, 2011)

Learn to multi quote


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

The multi-quote button is your friend...and we seriously need to move on from the Omnipotent argument...

What the fuck are you even trying to argue about, are you insulting us as well as suporting our argument at the exact same fucking time. 

Because you flip so wildly around between sentences.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Emperor Joker said:


> But that's impossible for an entire species to be omnipotent..and if they do have limits then they can't fit the definition of the word Omnipotent in the first pace (All Powerful)



but what if the author made them all to be op?


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

Galactus absorbed the elders of the universe whos collective power isn't even galaxy level and started dying because their energies were too much for him.


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> Galactus absorbed the elders of the universe whos collective power isn't even galaxy level and started dying because their energies were too much for him.



The Elders are kinda a very odd case....they're not exactly what you'd call normal characters


----------



## Wolfgang Grimmer (Apr 28, 2011)

You could use the quote system spaniard


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 28, 2011)

Galactus does get wanked (beating Fei smh) but so does the Q.

So it's a battle of the least wanked!


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 28, 2011)

Keollyn said:


> Galactus does get wanked (beating Fei smh) but



Not this shit again


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 28, 2011)

It's very smh worthy.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

I just posted two feats of him being above that. But if you want more:








EDIT Sore loser much?


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Emperor Joker said:


> The multi-quote button is your friend...and we seriously need to move on from the Omnipotent argument...
> 
> What the fuck are you even trying to argue about, are you insulting us as well as supoorting are argument at the exact same fucking time.
> 
> Because you flip so wildly around between sentences.



all I say is that how can you say they are not omnipotent because they cannot surpass another omnipotent.


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> all I say is that how can you say they are not omnipotent because they cannot surpass another omnipotent.



Because you wouldn't be All Powerful if another character could surpass and beat you, that's what Omnipotence is.

Irregardless can we move past the Omnipotence argument shall we.


----------



## Shock Therapy (Apr 28, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> all I say is that how can you say they are not omnipotent because they cannot surpass another omnipotent.



don't think you know what the word omnipotent means


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Emperor Joker said:


> The multi-quote button is your friend...and we seriously need to move on from the Omnipotent argument...
> 
> What the fuck are you even trying to argue about, are you insulting us as well as suporting our argument at the exact same fucking time.
> 
> Because you flip so wildly around between sentences.





Tranquil Fury said:


> I just posted two feats of him being above that. But if you want more:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Emperor Joker said:


> Because you wouldn't be All Powerful if another character could surpass and beat you, that's what Omnipotence is.
> 
> Irregardless can we move past the Omnipotence argument shall we.



but how can an omnipotent surpass another omnipotent? that is impossible.



Shock Therapy said:


> don't think you know what the word omnipotent means




all powerful that no one can  beat you and you can do the impossible... but this guy said if an omnipotent cannot surpass another omnipotent then they are not omnipotent.


----------



## Emperor Joker (Apr 28, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> but how can an omnipotent surpass another omnipotent? that is impossible.



Yes it's impossible, so what exactly are you trying to argue. An Omnipotence battle just ends in a stalemate. But there can't be more than one Omnipotent in a universe, it's just not possible.

Edit: No what i'm saying is if a supposed Omnipotent has limits and can't do something...then they aren't Omnipotent. an Omnipotent can do everything that is what Omnipotence is.


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

Posting Marvel Adventures stories...............now thats true wank


That thread vs Fei was worse then this though


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> Posting Marvel Adventures stories...............now thats true wank
> 
> 
> That thread vs Fei was worse then this though



what does wank mean in terms of comics?


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 28, 2011)

Are there different kinds?


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

, if it's canon it counts. If you still want to argue then even without that feat I've posted other feats and I can post more. You are being dishonest saying a supernova can hurt Galactus even when he's teleported into one amongst many other feats. You are saying Galactus is below universal when even his bio, annihilus's purporse for using him, the event with black celestial and even the fight against Mephisto in his own realm says otherwise.


----------



## EnigmaJ (Apr 28, 2011)

Apparently Marvel Adventures take places place on Earth-20051, rather than the mainstream 616 universe. Is every single Galactus throughout the multiverse the same one?


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

So basically you think Marvel adventures stories are canon which they aren't unless its 616 Galactus you have no bussiness posting that stuff.
and 
You think handbook entries hold more weight then what is shown on panel.............cause its not like the handbooks don't end up being wrong half the time.

I can post whatever Galactus feat I want as long as it happens to be in continuity since they all happened to 616 Galactus.

Galactus has been hurt by things weaker then Supernova's you want me to post Dr Strange kicking his ass all over NY to prove a point? If you want to wank his high end feats then that just gives people more reason to low ball. The point is to find a middle ground


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> Galactus absorbed the elders of the universe whos collective power isn't even galaxy level and started dying because their energies were too much for him.



Yet it's obvious that Galactus can absorb Mephisto's dimension, was threatening to devour the universe, absorb the power of Hyperstorm whose power was sourced to the infinite of hyperspace, and we even have him expelling enough power in Annihilation to affect numerous galactic empires to horrifically devastate the invasion fleet of the negative zone universe. Oh yeah, there's also the situation of weakened, hungered Galactus actually harming the multiversal The Hunger. Any attempts to simply suggest energy manipulation and absorption below that of galaxy level for Galactus is a giant waste of time and common sense as feat list go.

You're suggesting a supernova would simply hurt Galactus as if Silver Surfer creating a black hole and Gladiator having enough durability to withstand a supernova doesn't make things all the more obvious.



Matta Clatta said:


> Posting Marvel Adventures stories...............now thats true wank
> 
> 
> That thread vs Fei was worse then this though



That's not Marvel Adventures.


Matta Clatta said:


> Galactus has been hurt by things weaker then Supernova's you want me to post Dr Strange kicking his ass all over NY to prove a point? If you want to wank his high end feats then that just gives people more reason to low ball. The point is to find a middle ground



Because Dr Strange hasn't already proven to have a level of power beyond a supernova?

We have already brought up numerous feats upon feats for Galactus that make it clear that supernova level is a joke. Galaxy level is a joke. Then again, your whole rhetoric and utter ignorance is nothing but.


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> Yet it's obvious that Galactus can absorb Mephisto's dimension, was threatening to devour the universe, absorb the power of Hyperstorm whose power was sourced to the infinite of hyperspace, and we even have him expelling enough power in Annihilation to affect numerous galactic empires to horrifically devastate the invasion fleet of the negative zone universe. Oh yeah, there's also the situation of weakened, hungered Galactus actually harming the multiversal The Hunger. Any attempts to simply suggest energy manipulation and absorption below that of galaxy level for Galactus is a giant waste of time and common sense as feat list go.



Mephisto's dimension is smaller then an actual universe just like all the pocket dimensions are smaller then actual universes. We don't know the size so you mentioning these instances add up to nothing unless you can actually prove how big they are.
Galactus didn't destroy the Annihilation wave and this was him trying his hardest mind you. 
frankly it unless you assume the maximum high end(which we never do) he only destroyed a galaxy and that was after he spent some time prepping.


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> all powerful that no one can  beat you and you can do the impossible... but this guy said if an omnipotent cannot surpass another omnipotent then they are not omnipotent.



Two omnipotents cannot exist in the same series. That should be common sense.

Character A can do anything. Character A is therefore omnipotent.
Character B can do anything. Character B should be omnipotent as well.

But there's a problem here. If Character A can do anything, they should be able to stop Character B from doing something. Likewise, if Character B can do anything, it should be impossible to stop them from doing what they want.

If Character A can stop Character B, it means Character B cannot do whatever they were going to do unless Character A lets them. Since Character B cannot override Character A's resistance, there is something they cannot do, making it impossible for them to be omnipotent.

On the other hand, if Character A fails to stop Character B, it means there is something Character A cannot do, which means Character A cannot be an omnipotent.

Omnipotence means you are all powerful. If an alleged omnipotent is rivaled by another character in the same series, they cannot be omnipotent. You cannot be challenged by anything when you are all powerful. It's that simple.


----------



## Matta Clatta (Apr 28, 2011)

Also common sense here
If Dr Strange had used the cumulative energy of a supernova and beyond in his fight with Galactus the entire planet would have been destroyed.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Keollyn said:


> Are there different kinds?



who were you replying to?



Matta Clatta said:


> So basically you think Marvel adventures stories are canon which they aren't unless its 616 Galactus you have no bussiness posting that stuff.
> and
> You think handbook entries hold more weight then what is shown on panel.............cause its not like the handbooks don't end up being wrong half the time.
> 
> ...



 how are you banned and still online?


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta said:


> Mephisto's dimension is smaller then an actual universe just like all the pocket dimensions are smaller then actual universes.


Because you said so?


> We don't know the size so you mentioning these instances add up to nothing unless you can actually prove how big they are.


An infinite hyperspace, a dimension that is even described to be affected by the battle between Galactus and Mephisto that would soon risk the "universe," a multiversal being that consumes universes, etc. as all described in narration and image doesn't tell us anything?


> Galactus didn't destroy the Annihilation wave and this was him trying his hardest mind you.



Learn to read:


> we even have him expelling enough power in Annihilation to affect numerous galactic empires to horrifically devastate the invasion fleet of the negative zone universe.



He unleashed his wrath throughout the Annihilation fleet that spread throughout Kree and Super Skrull galactic empires. It was the only thing that allowed the Kree and other resistant forces to beat back the Annihilation Wave at all.

I wouldn't consider that him trying his hardest when has a past issue of threatening the universe itself with his hunger and other feats. It all goes to show he has a level of range and power you can't laughably suggest to be weak against a supernova.


> frankly it unless you assume the maximum high end(which we never do) he only destroyed a galaxy and that was after he spent some time prepping.



Frankly, I don't think you're the person we should trust on interpreting much of anything. Your attempt to bring up only one thing that's outnumbered by numerous feats that are committed with or without the UN involved makes it clear you're simply arguing out of sense of wanting to win this discussion rather than thinking about a correlation of facts that heavily bend in one direction rather than the other.


Matta Clatta said:


> Also common sense here
> If Dr Strange had used the cumulative energy of a supernova and beyond in his fight with Galactus the entire planet would have been destroyed.



Not much common sense when you don't seem to understand the concept of a focused attack. I'm still amused by how you're suggesting a minority event you're not willing to truly specify while I have a plethora of bouts and feats to make it obvious the supernova to galaxy level is a blatant joke. You're practically suggesting Galactus is less durable than Gladiator here.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Eldritch Sukima said:


> Two omnipotents cannot exist in the same series. That should be common sense.
> 
> Character A can do anything. Character A is therefore omnipotent.
> Character B can do anything. Character B should be omnipotent as well.
> ...



then omnipotents vs omnipotents threads should not exist because of what you just said.


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> then omnipotents vs omnipotents threads should not exist because of what you just said.



They shouldn't exist because they're stupid and go nowhere, not because of anything I said in that post. Two omnipotents from different series cannot invalidate each other because each one is all powerful in their own canon.


----------



## KaiserWombat (Apr 28, 2011)

You don't argue characters as omnipotents. You ignore such statements and hype and attempt to establish the victor by superior abilities and feats.


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

KaiserWombat said:


> You don't argue characters as omnipotents. You ignore such statements and hype and attempt to establish the victor by superior abilities and feats.



Yeah, also that.


----------



## EnigmaJ (Apr 28, 2011)

Exactly. People wouldn't be so quick take statements such as "Character X is above all others", "Character Y can do anything", or "Character Z cannot be defeated". There's no real difference between statements such as these statements which state that a certain character is "omnipotent". Even if its an author statement, it should still only be considered within the context of the universe itself. Take Galactus and drop him into our real world universe, he'd pretty much fit the criteria for an omnipotent, but drop him into the DC Multiverse, that wouldn't be the case.  In the same way, a character that is "omnipotent" in one universe or multiverse may not necessarily remain that way when his reality suddenly expands past that which the author intended ( as we do in vs matches ).

And then there's also the question of whether an Omnipotent is capable of doing anything that is possible to imagine or whether an Omnipotent is capable of doing anything that is within the realm of possibility... but that just gets no where...


----------



## Desumiturus (Apr 28, 2011)

Doesn't Q suggest changing the universal gravitational constant when he is depowered? The implication seemed to be that not only is that something he can normally do, but it's something he considers trivial. Wouldn't that suggest that he is universal at the very least?


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Eldritch Sukima said:


> Yeah, also that.



to be honest dude most omnipotent characters are never really stated by the author but stated by the people... they could be wrong you know.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Apr 28, 2011)

Matta Clatta the idea that a supernova can do anything to a well fed Galactus is hilarious and wrong. I post multiple scans that say Galactus is above star level on average even from 616, don't want bios? fine, the others do fine as well even limiting it to 616. How can characters below Galactus have star level durability but not Galactus himself?


----------



## Eldritch Sukima (Apr 28, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> to be honest dude most omnipotent characters are never really stated by the author but stated by the people... they could be wrong you know.



All the more reason to take omnipotence in general with a grain of salt.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 28, 2011)

Eldritch Sukima said:


> All the more reason to take omnipotence in general with a grain of salt.



sorry but what does that mean? excuse my ignorance.


----------



## KaiserWombat (Apr 28, 2011)

If somebody says "Character A is called omnipotent, therefore they win against Character B" and provide no other evidence, don't take them seriously.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Oh Geez how has this thread gone no for 5 fucking pages? 

Time to smack down some wank



Winny said:


> One of them alone can stop death



What does this even mean? I've seen every Q episode and I have no idea what you're talking about



> create life



So can a Herald like Surfer with only a miniscule fraction of Galactus' power. Hell, Surfer has better feats in this area than Q does.



> travel through time



You know how many characters in Marvel can do that? It's not a big deal, especially not against the likes of Big G.



> stop time



Don't ever recall this happening.



> and create entire worlds  effortlessly.



Blatant lie. Closest was when Q created the replica of Sherwood forest but that was hardly a world, more like a few acres.



> Oh, and they can give others that power.



Only the Continuum as a whole can do that.



> In fact, the only limit on a Q's power is the inability to overcome the powers of another Q.



Because they never went up against anything powerful on this scale?

Not to mention this is wrong.

In Encounter at Farpoint, Q made a point of disabling the bridge crew's phasers before teleporting them. Why would he do that if they were no threat to him?

Q was also scared of Guinan and the Borg.

One Q was trapped inside of a comet.

Q was hurt when Sisko punched him.

Stop wanking.



> How does Thor do _anything_ more impressive than that?



Destructive power: Best any Q has shown was creating a supernova. Thor has tanked those and dished out more.

Thor once contained a blast with enough power to destroy 1/5th of the universe (and another such blast actually did that, so this is not by any means a hyperbole).

Thor beat Glory who was attacking on many levels of reality simultaneously.



> Oh wait, no, sorry. I completely forgot. When it comes to the OBD, Marvel always wins.



They only win when put up against inferior enemies. Such is the case here.



> *Black Leg Sanji:* Er... Why don't you prove that there can't be more than one omnipotent being in a single universe?



Others have already addressed how retarded this statement is. I'll just add that Q are not omnipotent, the one who most commonly appears just likes to boast. A more sane one admitted they were not.



Winny said:


> Ugh, don't you _read_? The only thing a Q cannot do is overcome the powers of another Q. Besides, I clearly pointed out that - if you don't want to consider them omnipotent - they're still limitless reality warpers.



Again, wrong. Show feats that compare to Galactus' feats. (You won't be able to because they don't exist).

Doing a little reality warping doesn't mean you can assume they can do things on a scale and level they have never demonstrated.



> But meh... I should've known not to get involved in a thread about Galactus. The wank for that guy is just obscene. Has he ever actually lost a match here, ever?



Link removed

A small sampling.



SpaceMook said:


> Going to play devils advocate, despite me not wanting to.
> 
> Q goes back in time and destroys Galactus before he hatches from the Cosmic Egg.



They're going to go back in time to a space-time continuum that doesn't exist? The previous universe was completely destroyed and it can't be accessed via time - travel. Not to mention Big G is temporally aware.



Winny said:


> The funniest one? He lost to Mad Jim Jaspers apparently and that guy is about as strong as any single Q. So is it just some rule that says Galactus can't lose to anyone not in a Marvel/DC comic?



MJJ was an omniversal threat. You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. Jimmy would bitchsmack the Continuum with his left nut.



> They're _called_ omnipotent in Star Trek. I'm not trying to pass off anything. I'm just getting a bunch of people telling me that obviously the writers don't know what they're talking about and therefore everything is to be ignored. Which is retarded.



Odin has also been called omnipotent in Marvel. Guess what? Galactus is stronger than him. Someone being "called" omnipotent doesn't mean shit. Not to mention that it's completely confirmed that Q was talking out of his ass.



			
				Quinn said:
			
		

> You mustn't think of us as omnipotent, no matter what The Continuum would like you to believe. You and your ship seem incredibly powerful to life-forms without your technical expertise. It's no different with us. We may appear omnipotent to you, but believe me, we're not.





Winny said:


> He's a limitless reality warper, just like any Q. What's the difference?



Universal nullification couldn't kill him. He beat Merlyn and Roma who were the Omniversal Guardians. His power was spreading across the omniverse which is composed of infinite megaverses each with infinite multiverses each with infinite universes. This is like asking what the difference is between a guy who can destroy a house and a guy who can destroy a planet.



> Or is it simply that Marvel has an omniverse and Star Trek doesn't, therefore the Q are automatically weaker just because their continuity isn't as fucked up as Marvels and doesn't need arse-pulls like that?



Not the old Haruhitard argument again 

Whining that one fiction doesn't have the expanse of other to show feats doesn't mean shit. You still don't have the feats. If the writer wanted them to have omniversal feats, they would.



Matta Clatta said:


> ]The entire Q race as a whole have feats that would be enough to give Galactus a good fight.



No they don't. Their best feat was causing a few stars to go supernova in a small part of the Delta Quadrant (which is just one part of a galaxy) as a result of a species - wide civil war. Yes, it was bleedthrough from another dimension, but when Galactus fought Mephisto in his realm (also another dimension) their battle was also causing bleedthrough damage to the main reality, except this time it was devastating galaxies and damaging the entire universe.



Matta Clatta said:


> If you want to use that story as evidence of Galactus holding complete control over the UN then most of you would need  to stop cherry picking scans from respect threads and actually read the story since someone with complete control over the Nullifier wouldn't end up dropping it into the hands of Reed Richards after said statement about it basically being his heart when he gets attacked.



He let Reed use it.



> Now as for a singular Q lacking feats to hurt Galactus I'd believe that but saying the entire species can't hurt him is wank when even Thor throwing Mjolnir has hurt him.



Yeah, a starving, dying Galactus who was also getting pounded by Ego 



KaiserWombat said:


> That being said, I think even Marvel/DC's references of omnipotence should be honestly be taken with a grain of salt, given the boundaries of any fiction and the rather liberal usage of the term (the "levels of omnipotence" statement by Kubik springs to mind): after all, isn't the OBD primarily discussing by feats and not intangible statements and hype?
> 
> The concept is omnipotence is just incompatible with versus threads because it is not a concept that can be verified by evidence.



Kubik was talking about levels of infinity, not levels of omnipotence 



Matta Clatta said:


> No he didn't allow Reed to use it he dropped after he got attacked and it fell into Reed's hand because they were all fighting for control of the UN. Now if he had compltete control over it you would have to think it wouldn't be an issue anyway.



He could have taken it from Reed at any time. This was made obvious. He let Reed use it. After all, they had the same goal - defeat Abraxas.



> A supernova would hurt Galactus and thats beside the point of you basically diverting your argument into Galactus is a force of the universe in Marvel so no attack done by anyone below abstract level should hurt him which is hardly how its presented in the comics.



In the Thanos miniseries he teleported into the center of a supernova and just chilled there with no affect on him whatsoever

An instant star - system annihilating attack from Magus didn't phase him at all.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Cthulhu-versailles said:


> Thor is a little bitch.



You're going to get a hammer to the face for that. 



> That's sounds like a cop out. I mean, this isn't a fight against the "infinte" alternate Galactus' from different timelines. It's suppose to be one "Galactus" Vs The Q. Are there any feats for 'Galactus' resisting funky chunky time crunky? As to his past, all I know is he was created at the Big Bang or something like that. Is that right??? If so, The Q can go before the big bang...



No, no they can't. That scene was from another dimension. Galactus existed before the current universe and originates from a space-time continuum that was collapsed and can't be accessed by time travel. He's beyond concepts such as time anyway. The universal abstract of time, Kronos, is lesser than him. Get this through your head.



> I didn't see anything quantifiable in the 2 scans! Universe(s) can differ in size to the point it makes no sense. Is there anything indicating this "erased" universe was as large or larger than our own? Some more context would be nice...



If you're referring to the Black Celestial Saga, it was part of the 616 multiverse, and all the universes there have similar dimensions and physical laws to the normal universe.



> Also, if you're gonna powerscale one side you gotta do it for the other. In the case of Q you could technically powerscale anything ever shown in Star Trek as something they can do.....



Except there is absolutely no logic or precedent behind this. Many ST entities have demonstrated things Q never has shown or even hinted at.



> PS: I thought Eternity and Galactus had strength limited to "one zonky marvel universe" like shown in the Infinity Gaunlet Saga with Thanos. Doesn't each universe have one of them and an M-Body living tribunal?



616 Galactus is the strongest Galactus.



Matta Clatta said:


> Hardly the same thing. If you stub your toe you still have your foot on your body in your possession.
> If Galactus gets attacked he loses possesion of the UN which is my point. He doesn't have complete control over it and it can be taken away by force hence him dropping it. I don't care about him allowing Reed to use it the point is he dropped it in the first place which kills your argument.



No, no it doesn't. If he wanted it back he would summon it back. This was *directly shown in the comic.*



> Galactus has gotten killed by his space ship blowing up. Multiple Supernova's would be able to murder him a million times over.



Lie. Never happened.



Matta Clatta said:


> Galactus absorbed the elders of the universe whos collective power isn't even galaxy level and started dying because their energies were too much for him.



Lie. The Grandmaster alone is at least Cube Being level.



Keollyn said:


> Galactus does get wanked (beating Fei smh) but so does the Q.



Fei is Galactus' bitch.





Keollyn said:


> It's very smh worthy.



If by "it" you mean the fact that you kept arguing when you were obviously wrong, I agree 



spaniardguitarist said:


> but how can an omnipotent surpass another omnipotent? that is impossible.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No one in this thread is omnipotent. Stop posting about it.



EnigmaJ said:


> Apparently Marvel Adventures take places place on Earth-20051, rather than the mainstream 616 universe. Is every single Galactus throughout the multiverse the same one?



No, but the 616 Galactus is the strongest, therefore by powerscaling anything any alternate Galactus can do should be within the capabilities of the 616 version.



Matta Clatta said:


> Galactus has been hurt by things weaker then Supernova's you want me to post Dr Strange kicking his ass all over NY to prove a point?



You mean when he was cosmically poisoned and dying and Strange still had to call upon a powerful god to KO him? 

This is the same bullshit DBZtards pull by defining a character by low - end feats since they know they will lose if we use the high ones. And by that I mean consistent high feats, not PIS/one - time high feats.



Matta Clatta said:


> Mephisto's dimension is smaller then an actual universe just like all the pocket dimensions are smaller then actual universes.



Evidence for this claim?



> We don't know the size so you mentioning these instances add up to nothing unless you can actually prove how big they are.



Big enough to hold a good chunk of all the souls that have ever died. Big enough that a tiny chunk of it was enough to house Hela's Hel.



> Galactus didn't destroy the Annihilation wave and this was him trying his hardest mind you.



Wow, lie. He had been starved and drained for months and had almost no power left (relatively speaking).



> frankly it unless you assume the maximum high end(which we never do) he only destroyed a galaxy and that was after he spent some time prepping.



Yes, he was "prepping" while he was strapped to a machine with pretty much no power and no consciousness. Wow. 



Matta Clatta said:


> Also common sense here
> If Dr Strange had used the cumulative energy of a supernova and beyond in his fight with Galactus the entire planet would have been destroyed.



He used a mental/psychic spell powered by a god. It wasn't a destructive/brute force attack. And again, Galactus was *poisoned, starving, and dying* at this point. 



Desumiturus said:


> Doesn't Q suggest changing the universal gravitational constant when he is depowered? The implication seemed to be that not only is that something he can normally do, but it's something he considers trivial. Wouldn't that suggest that he is universal at the very least?



Not unless you can provide evidence that he can actually do it aside from just a statement.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 29, 2011)

Pwned 

Out of curiousity, whats The Qs greatest destructive-feat


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Black Leg Sanji said:


> Out of curiousity, whats The Qs greatest destructive-feat



I mentioned this in my post. Indirectly causing supernovae.


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 29, 2011)

I'm wrong when someone debates hypothetical, never shown, characters. Then runs behind his wiki and proclaim a victory for one side when nothing was even settled.

Truly a smh smhy. But that has been becoming a norm for you Mike.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 29, 2011)

It should have been set as inconclusive 

Then both sides would have been happy


----------



## Vault (Apr 29, 2011)

Lol at Galactus barely holding the Annihilation wave, dude BARELY had any power left yet he wiped out almost all of it including a couple galaxies in the process  Also trying to say getting killed by Galactus' ship is lul worthy is so fucking stupid  Galactus' ship is star level easy and Reed even mentioned how much enefgy Taa has. Even the world mind thought Nova wouldn't survive going through its engines


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Keollyn said:


> I'm wrong when someone debates hypothetical, never shown, characters. Then runs behind his wiki and proclaim a victory for one side when nothing was even settled.
> 
> Truly a smh smhy. But that has been becoming a norm for you Mike.



You refused to reply to my arguments after a while. In my book, that's a concession.



Vault said:


> Lol at Galactus barely holding the Annihilation wave, dude BARELY had any power left yet he wiped out almost all of it including a couple galaxies in the process Also trying to say getting killed by Galactus' ship is lul worthy is so fucking stupid  Galactus' ship is star level easy and Reed even mentioned how much enefgy Taa has. Even the world mind thought Nova wouldn't survive going through its engines



Not to mention Korvac (a normal human) got powered up to beyond Skyfather level just by accessing some technology in it


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 29, 2011)

spaniardguitarist said:


> who were you replying to?
> 
> 
> 
> how are you banned and still online?





Black Leg Sanji said:


> It should have been set as inconclusive
> 
> Then both sides would have been happy



Satisfaction isn't even necessary. Just a very weird thing to do.


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 29, 2011)

How did I end up quoting Spaniard?

This phone...


----------



## SpaceMook (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> They're going to go back in time to a space-time continuum that doesn't exist? The previous universe was completely destroyed and it can't be accessed via time - travel. Not to mention Big G is temporally aware.



Thanks, I didn't know it doesn't exist anymore, mind if I have a source from where this was stated? Might need it later.

Clarification, I've heard arguments that Q can survive Big Bang Energies, apparently Quinn couldn't find a single force in the universe that could kill him. He wanted to die, but couldn't. One of Quinn's hiding places was prior to the Big Bang. Meaning that the formation of the universe has no effect on killing a Q.

This true?


----------



## billy3 (Apr 29, 2011)

The biggest issue for the Q is the lack of feats...  on the flip side, the only limitation they're shown to have is vulnerability to other Q.

Q's "fear" of Guinan and bleeding when punched only indicates vulnerability for their "human" manisfestations...  they manifest as full on flesh and blood to interact with humanoids.  Allowing himself to bleed is all part of that interaction...  the physical "body" is "hurt" but his actaul being and essence isn't - perfectly in line with Q's eccentricity.

Q's exagterated dodging around the table from Guinan in front of Picard is consistent with his eccentric behaviour...  he could've teleported if she was a real threat to his actual being (again, different from a threat to his "body").  This way he gets to mess with some heads and it's just more plain fun.

As for granting others Q powers, Q granted those to Riker.  There's no indication of the rest of the continuum being needed to do so.  The times Q does say an action has the approval of the rest of the continuum, that just indicates that the Q typically act in consensus and agreement, not that they need to collectively act to accomplish anything.  In fact, the only action they've demonstrated actually involving combining the powers of two Q is reproduction, and even that is not indicated as actually requiring multiple Q to accomplish, just that the involvement of multiple Q is a more intimate experience.

So can the Q take Galactus, especially given that the VS is stated as "the Q", plural, instead of just "Q"?  Well, is Galactus vulnerable to other beings not of his "species"?  Apparently so.  Are the Q?  Apparently not.  Butt heads over that however you want.


----------



## billy3 (Apr 29, 2011)

SpaceMook said:


> Thanks, I didn't know it doesn't exist anymore, mind if I have a source from where this was stated? Might need it later.
> 
> Clarification, I've heard arguments that Q can survive Big Bang Energies, apparently Quinn couldn't find a single force in the universe that could kill him. He wanted to die, but couldn't. One of Quinn's hiding places was prior to the Big Bang. Meaning that the formation of the universe has no effect on killing a Q.
> 
> This true?



Correct, the only way for a Q to die is to first have its powers stripped/made killable, which is only demonstrated as possible by another Q.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

SpaceMook said:


> Thanks, I didn't know it doesn't exist anymore, mind if I have a source from where this was stated? Might need it later.



It's his origin story 



> Clarification, I've heard arguments that Q can survive Big Bang Energies, apparently Quinn couldn't find a single force in the universe that could kill him. He wanted to die, but couldn't. One of Quinn's hiding places was prior to the Big Bang. Meaning that the formation of the universe has no effect on killing a Q.
> 
> This true?



No, as they were obviously not inside of it.



billy3 said:


> The biggest issue for the Q is the lack of feats...  on the flip side, the only limitation they're shown to have is vulnerability to other Q.
> 
> Q's "fear" of Guinan and bleeding when punched only indicates vulnerability for their "human" manisfestations...  they manifest as full on flesh and blood to interact with humanoids.  Allowing himself to bleed is all part of that interaction...  the physical "body" is "hurt" but his actaul being and essence isn't - perfectly in line with Q's eccentricity.



So why be scared if he can't be hurt? He was scared of Guinan.



> Q's exagterated dodging around the table from Guinan in front of Picard is consistent with his eccentric behaviour...  he could've teleported if she was a real threat to his actual being (again, different from a threat to his "body").  This way he gets to mess with some heads and it's just more plain fun.



They went into kung-fu DBZ ki blast fighting poses. You're making stuff up.



> As for granting others Q powers, Q granted those to Riker.  There's no indication of the rest of the continuum being needed to do so.



Wrong. Q was still representing the Continuum back then. That was before he broke off.



> So can the Q take Galactus, especially given that the VS is stated as "the Q", plural, instead of just "Q"?  Well, is Galactus vulnerable to other beings not of his "species"?  Apparently so.  Are the Q?  Apparently not.  Butt heads over that however you want.



Galactus has no fucking species. He is a unique being 

Q has never faced the likes of what Galactus can do.



billy3 said:


> Correct, the only way for a Q to die is to first have its powers stripped/made killable, which is only demonstrated as possible by another Q.



Wrong. They were getting killed by weapons that humans could use that could create supernovae.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> So why be scared if he can't be hurt? He was scared of Guinan.



Just one thing - Guinan is an El-Aurian. They're exceptionally old, empathic, telepathic, they can view all of time and space _and_ they can even see into alternate timelines and universes. Q was scared of her for her knowledge, not for any ability to kill him or anything. It's no different at all to why Madara was scared of Itachi, even though Itachi was clearly no match (there are a lot of examples like this in fiction, but I see no reason to drag more out). _Knowledge_ is a frightening thing.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 29, 2011)

Keollyn said:


> Satisfaction isn't even necessary.


----------



## Fang (Apr 29, 2011)

Vault said:


> Lol at Galactus barely holding the Annihilation wave, dude BARELY had any power left yet he wiped out almost all of it including a couple galaxies in the process  Also trying to say getting killed by Galactus' ship is lul worthy is so fucking stupid  Galactus' ship is star level easy and Reed even mentioned how much enefgy Taa has. Even the world mind thought Nova wouldn't survive going through its engines



I'm pretty sure he only destroyed three star systems at the end of Annihilation Wave but he was near dead and completely starving and being tapped for the Power Cosmic by Thanos and Annihilus for months on end, but I could be wrong.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> Just one thing - Guinan is an El-Aurian. They're exceptionally old, empathic, telepathic, they can view all of time and space _and_ they can even see into alternate timelines and universes. Q was scared of her for her knowledge, not for any ability to kill him or anything. It's no different at all to why Madara was scared of Itachi, even though Itachi was clearly no match (there are a lot of examples like this in fiction, but I see no reason to drag more out). _Knowledge_ is a frightening thing.



Didn't stop them from getting their asses kicked by the Borg. And they can't see all of time and space or any such bullshit, they just have a heightened sensitivity to temporal anomalies. And they were clearly physically threatening each other.


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 29, 2011)

Well except for that one.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Didn't stop them from getting their asses kicked by the Borg. And they can't see all of time and space or any such bullshit, they just have a heightened sensitivity to temporal anomalies. And they were clearly physically threatening each other.



You _really_ seem to like to downplay pretty much everything that isn't Marvel, don't you? It's like you have some weird complex where everything said by any 'verse not called Marvel is automatically wrong because of _science_ *jazz hands*, yet the guys at Marvel can come up with the most inane crap and you'll lap it up without question.

The El-Aurians got their arses kicked by the Borg for the same reason every other species in the Star Trek universe - bar the Q - did. They had no way of surviving. If the Borg come after you, you're screwed. No amount of running and hiding will save you and trying to fight them is futile. Trying to say "they got owned by the Borg, so they must suck" is an absolutely ridiculous statement to make.


----------



## Vault (Apr 29, 2011)

Fang said:


> I'm pretty sure he only destroyed three star systems at the end of Annihilation Wave but he was near dead and completely starving and being tapped for the Power Cosmic by Thanos and Annihilus for months on end, but I could be wrong.



You may be right, but a galaxy still is technically a star system albeit much larger.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> You _really_ seem to like to downplay pretty much everything that isn't Marvel, don't you? It's like you have some weird complex where everything said by any 'verse not called Marvel is automatically wrong because of _science_ *jazz hands*, yet the guys at Marvel can come up with the most inane crap and you'll lap it up without question.



Get off the appeal to motive and try actually arguing.



> The El-Aurians got their arses kicked by the Borg for the same reason every other species in the Star Trek universe - bar the Q - did. They had no way of surviving. If the Borg come after you, you're screwed. No amount of running and hiding will save you and trying to fight them is futile. Trying to say "they got owned by the Borg, so they must suck" is an absolutely ridiculous statement to make.



Except the Borg are some of the most retarded and inept villains in all of sci-fi.

They send one cube after the Federation, it gets destroyed, they wait 6 years, and then what do they do? They send one cube. Again. Not to mention constantly getting outwitted by a woman who was too dumb to comprehend the idea of a delay timer for an explosion.

Honestly, try making some actual arguments here. Qs have no feats that put them anywhere near Galactus.



Vault said:


> You may be right, but a galaxy still is technically a star system albeit much larger.



Um, no.


----------



## xeno335 (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Get off the appeal to motive and try actually arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



LMAO did that really happen?? i was going to watch the whole borg arc on TNG but if thats what happened then i dont even know if its worth it.


----------



## Vault (Apr 29, 2011)

> A star system or stellar system is a small number of stars which orbit each other,[1]bound by gravitational attraction. A large number of stars bound by gravitation is generally called a star clusteror galaxy, although, broadly speaking, they are also star systems.







> Galaxies may contain many star systems, star clusters, and various interstellar clouds. The Sun is one of the stars in the Milky Way galaxy; the Solar System includes the Earth and all the other objects that orbit the Sun.





> A large number of stars with a perceptible structure; a galaxy



Saying what i said really isnt a stretch.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Well the second cube was shown in the movie First Contact


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Vault said:


> Saying what i said really isnt a stretch.



That's equivocation and you know it.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Get off the appeal to motive and try actually arguing.



Why bother? You're just going to do as you've always done.

Me: "Word of God says the Q are omnipotent."
You: "No they're not!"
Me: "Why aren't they?"
You: "'Cause I say so!"
Me: "The El-Aurians can see space and time and even alternate timelines and universes."
You: "No they can't!"
Me: "Why not?"
You: "'Cause I say so!"

You give no actual reasons for your arguments, you just constantly go on about how you disagree with what the writers are telling you - like you somehow know how their universe works better than they do and they're wrong.



> Except the Borg are some of the most retarded and inept villains in all of sci-fi.
> 
> They send one cube after the Federation, it gets destroyed, they wait 6 years, and then what do they do? They send one cube. Again. Not to mention constantly getting outwitted by a woman who was too dumb to comprehend the idea of a delay timer for an explosion.



OMG! How _dare_ the writers induce plot stupidity so the Borg don't just steamroll the entire universe in half an episode? The Borg was obscenely strong, taking out any resistance in no time at all. They had to be weakened for the same reason every other race just happens to lose a few hundred IQ points whenever they go up against humans. They can build crazy-arse spaceships, create new planets and work out how to travel through time, but they get beaten by a jammie dodger. That's simply how fiction works.



> Honestly, try making some actual arguments here. Qs have no feats that put them anywhere near Galactus.



They may lack the feats, but powerscaling (another term loved here, I understand) puts even just one of them on a level capable of causing him problems. The entire race, on the other hand, would rape the hell out of him.


----------



## Fang (Apr 29, 2011)

Except for the fact that the Borg have routinely been introduced as incompetent from the get-go. They had an entire team ambushed by a couple characters because they didn't know what a fucking SENTRY is when they were assimilating the Enterprise's satellite array or whatever that comm outlet was called.

They sent another Borg Cube back in time not BEFORE the Federation at Earth had defense platforms, but during it. The Borg are fucking retards. They apparently also have devised the great naval tactic of sending individual Cubes or Spheres IN A STRAIGHT LINE at enemy units.


----------



## Sabotage (Apr 29, 2011)

Galactus wins for reasons already stated.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> Why bother? You're just going to do as you've always done.
> 
> Me: "Word of God says the Q are omnipotent."
> You: "No they're not!"
> ...



Word of God says no such thing. Q the individual said so, which is contradicted by actual evidence and by the statement by Quinn, which I quoted, and even provided an episode reference number. You are blatantly lying now.



> Me: "The El-Aurians can see space and time and even alternate timelines and universes."
> You: "No they can't!"
> Me: "Why not?"
> You: "'Cause I say so!"



No, they can't, because you made that up. Burden of proof is on the positive claim. Guinan was aware she was in an alternate timeline when no else knew, but how that translates to "seeing all of time and space" I have no idea. And even if she did, that hardly explains why she and Q were *physically squaring off.*

Furthermore, if the El-Auriens were so wise and knowledgeable, you'd think they would know about at least one of the methods that have been used to defeat the Borg before (like that weird geometric shape from "I, Borg" or the virus from "Endgame").



> You give no actual reasons for your arguments, you just constantly go on about how you disagree with what the writers are telling you - like you somehow know how their universe works better than they do and they're wrong.



I've been providing actual evidence, including direct quotes and references to episodes. You've just been lying out of your ass.



> OMG! How _dare_ the writers induce plot stupidity so the Borg don't just steamroll the entire universe in half an episode? The Borg was obscenely strong, taking out any resistance in no time at all. They had to be weakened for the same reason every other race just happens to lose a few hundred IQ points whenever they go up against humans.



You just violated SoD. Invalid argument. The Borg are retarded on the show, we don't just magically assume they're a billion times more competent behind - the - scenes.



> create new planets



Borg have never done this. Ever. You are, again, blatantly lying.



> and work out how to travel through time



Time travel in ST is fucking easy. Any race with warp drive can do it (slingshot maneuver).



> They may lack the feats, but powerscaling (another term loved here, I understand) puts even just one of them on a level capable of causing him problems. The entire race, on the other hand, would rape the hell out of him.



Wrong. Powerscaling only works when you have something to scale from. There is nothing in the entire STverse that comes close to Galactus.


----------



## Vault (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> That's equivocation and you know it.



If i was explaining it in a formal manner then maybe otherwise this is quite informal as i was addressing it to someone with the knowledge


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Vault said:


> If i was explaining it in a formal manner then maybe otherwise this is quite informal as i was addressing it to someone with the knowledge



You said galaxies. It's obvious what you were implying.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 29, 2011)

Maybe i should start Star Trek: TNG soon

I have only watched seperate episodes of it now and then not to mention i am running out of things to watch


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Black Leg Sanji said:


> Maybe i should start Star Trek: TNG soon
> 
> I have only watched seperate episodes of it now and then not to mention i am running out of things to watch



Protip: Skip the first two seasons. They suck ass.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Word of God says no such thing. Q the individual said so, which is contradicted by actual evidence and by the statement by Quinn, which I quoted, and even provided an episode reference number. You are blatantly lying now.
> 
> No, they can't, because you made that up. Burden of proof is on the positive claim. Guinan was aware she was in an alternate timeline when no else knew, but how that translates to "seeing all of time and space" I have no idea. And even if she did, that hardly explains why she and Q were *physically squaring off.*
> 
> ...



Right, whatever. Just forget it.

Just a warning, though - _never_ question my competency as a Mod just because of a little debate like you did in that lovely little neg. This is a stupid little debate and has absolutely no bearings whatsoever on my abilities as a Mod. You went way too far with that and for that alone I'm not even bothering to continue this discussion. I despise people who actually insult my own capabilities over trivial bullshit like this.



> Borg have never done this. Ever. You are, again, blatantly lying.
> 
> Time travel in ST is fucking easy. Any race with warp drive can do it (slingshot maneuver).



Nice reading comprehension. I would've hoped the Jammie Dodger reference would've made it perfectly clear I was referring to how the Daleks, another incredibly powerful race in an entire different TV show, become complete morons even though their level of technology would point to a race far smarter.


----------



## Vault (Apr 29, 2011)

Well it was more to do with my memory failing me then TWF corrected me so i just decided to try rectify with a rough stretch. I havent read Annihilation in awhile.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> Protip: Skip the first two seasons. They suck ass.



I think i can handle it after i endured the trash that was Heroes S2 and first half of S3


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> Right, whatever. Just forget it.



I would appreciate an apology for so blatantly lying and distorting my positions, but this concession will have to do.



> Just a warning, though - _never_ question my competency as a Mod just because of a little debate like you did in that lovely little neg. This is a stupid little debate and has absolutely no bearings whatsoever on my abilities as a Mod. You went way too far with that and for that alone I'm not even bothering to continue this discussion. I despise people who actually insult my own capabilities over trivial bullshit like this.



Mods should have the ability to think rationally and logically and not be biased. You have failed to demonstrate these attributes.

If it makes you feel any better, you're far from the worst mod on these forums.



> Nice reading comprehension. I would've hoped the Jammie Dodger reference would've made it perfectly clear I was referring to how the Daleks, another incredibly powerful race in an entire different TV show, become complete morons even though their level of technology would point to a race far smarter.





			
				you said:
			
		

> They had to be weakened for the same reason every other race just happens to lose a few hundred IQ points whenever they go up against humans. They can build crazy-arse spaceships, create new planets and work out how to travel through time, but they get beaten by a jammie dodger. That's simply how fiction works.



You simply said "they", referring to the Borg. And even at their most PIS - infested moments the Daleks were smarter than the Borg ever were.


----------



## Velocity (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> I would appreciate an apology for so blatantly lying and distorting my positions, but this concession will have to do.



Oh, I'm not conceding. I'm simply not continuing a debate with you, since you've proven multiple times that you're not the kind of person to bother having debates with. That you actually negged me over this nonsense and assaulted my competence as a Mod is proof of your immaturity, if nothing more.



> Mods should have the ability to think rationally and logically and not be biased. You have failed to demonstrate these attributes.



Again with the insulting me. I know what a Mod is, what they can do and what they should be able to. I don't need to answer to you, nor explain myself to you, nor do I need to put up with snide remarks that attempt to belittle me or my ability to do what I was asked to.

But alas, I have more important things to do that get told that I'm not worthy of my position. Besides, I'm not derailing someone else's threads further.


----------



## Fang (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> Oh, I'm not conceding. I'm simply not continuing a debate with you, since you've proven multiple times that you're not the kind of person to bother having debates with.



That is called a concession.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> Oh, I'm not conceding. I'm simply not continuing a debate with you, since you've proven multiple times that you're not the kind of person to bother having debates with. That you actually negged me over this nonsense and assaulted my competence as a Mod is proof of your immaturity, if nothing more.



I negged you because you were blatantly lying and distorting evidence. Call me old - fashioned, but I don't like it when people are dishonest.



> Again with the insulting me. I know what a Mod is, what they can do and what they should be able to. I don't need to answer to you, nor explain myself to you, nor do I need to put up with snide remarks that attempt to belittle me or my ability to do what I was asked to.



I wasn't insulting you, I was simply making an observation.


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 29, 2011)

Star Trek is awesome. I hate missing the reruns late night (which are new in my case).

Being a mod does not rid us from one of the most humanly trait a person can have. I never understand where such a way of thinking comes from.


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Keollyn said:


> Star Trek is awesome. I hate missing the reruns late night (which are new in my case).
> 
> Being a mod does not rid us from one of the most humanly trait a person can have. I never understand where such a way of thinking comes from.



Not saying mods should be perfect, they should just hold themselves to higher standards.


----------



## Black Leg Sanji (Apr 29, 2011)

I still remember that one ep with the old couple living alone on a planet

The nature of the old man was surprising to say the least


----------



## Castiel (Apr 29, 2011)

and that's why I don't post in debates anymore unless they're completely onesided


----------



## Keollyn (Apr 29, 2011)

I'm near my tenth episodes. Some episodes are great because they rely on mystery that I eat up.


----------



## Castiel (Apr 29, 2011)

The Gangster Planet is the best episode


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Kilogram said:


> The Gangster Planet is the best episode



That was TOS


----------



## Thor (Apr 29, 2011)

Tranquil Fury said:


> I could post scans of Galactus healing eternity an abstract, fighting Mephisto in his own realm, erasing a universe from existence etc. *Galactus is not a true abstract since there is no such thing as Galactus when you have concepts like Love, Death, Eternity* but Galactus's UN which is multiversal has been retconned as part of him making him Multiversal.



Galactus is Enthropy.


----------



## Fang (Apr 29, 2011)

Galactus isn't Entropy. 

Do you know entropy actually represents? Decay.


----------



## Castiel (Apr 29, 2011)

Still the greatest episode


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 29, 2011)

Entropy exists as an abstract in Marvel too though


----------



## Thor (Apr 29, 2011)

Fang said:


> Galactus isn't Entropy.
> 
> Do you know entropy actually represents? Decay.



Typo. I meant Equity. I was thinking of Imperiex for some reason. According to The Living Tribunal, Galactus represents Equity.


----------



## billy3 (Apr 29, 2011)

Like Winny said, Q backing away form Guinan doesn't at all indicate her being a threat to his being and is just part of the eccentric "human" behaviour he likes to exhibit around human beings.  

As for the Borg, when have they ever hurt Q?

Q, while human, stating the changing of the universal gravitational constant would have been a simple solution is clear indication that it would be something within his capabilities if he had his power restored.  He doesn't have to actually do it on screen, the claim is sufficient (unless you believe Picard never shits cuz you didn't see him do it on screen... if you do, please keep that to yourself, we don't need to know about your scheisser fetish).

Nowhere in ST canon is there any indication of anything being able to do actual harm to a Q entity (which is different from any flesh manisfestation they may present, which are just avatars), other than another Q.  Q can only die after being made killable...  a feat only doable by another Q.

Can they actually harm/defeat Galactus?  Possible and debatable.  Can Galactus actually harm/defeat them?  I seriously doubt so.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 29, 2011)

Baseless comments without the character actually doing it are meaningless. There's claiming that someone doesn't use the bathroom and there's claiming that someone has an actual feat needed for combat. Stop acting as if you're making a grand rhetoric when you haven't provided any evidence that comes close to feats we actually see Galactus perform.

You keep acting as if the limitations of one universe automatically define the basis of all other fictional verses. That's not how it works. Common sense dictates that the side with the greater amount of shown feats and powerscaling wins. Star Trek hasn't provided anything close to universal+.

You have absolutely nothing to suggest that Q has any feats that come close to what Galactus can do armed with the UN. When one side actually provides real feats of a high degree, it easily beats any weak insinuations of biased character statements that still don't compare at all with what we have been shown for Galactus.

Either provide evidence of the Q surpassing what Galactus with the UN can do or bugger off.


----------



## billy3 (Apr 29, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> Baseless comments without the character actually doing it are meaningless. There's claiming that someone doesn't use the bathroom and there's claiming that someone has an actual feat needed for combat. Stop acting as if you're making a grand rhetoric when you haven't provided any evidence that comes close to feats we actually see Galactus perform.



Q's statement makes it clear that particular feat is within the powers of a Q.  Whether or not you accept that is your problem. Also, whether or not that feat, regardless of if it's explicit or implicit, would suffice for overpowering Galactus is a separate issue - I believe it would not, but merely goes to show that the Q's powers are quite vast.



neodragzero said:


> You keep acting as if the limitations of one universe automatically define the basis of all other fictional verses. That's not how it works. Common sense dictates that the side with the greater amount of shown feats and powerscaling wins. Star Trek hasn't provided anything close to universal+.



Nope, the lack of explicit feats with no indicated cap/limitations just makes the match inconclusive.  The best one could argue for is a conditional victory based on hyperbole and assumption.



neodragzero said:


> You have absolutely nothing to suggest that Q has any feats that come close to what Galactus can do armed with the UN. When one side actually provides real feats of a high degree, it easily beats any weak insinuations of biased character statements that still don't compare at all with what we have been shown for Galactus.



The issue is there are no known limitations to the Q...  again, the lack of explicit feats just makes it as inconclusive as "the unstoppable force meets the unmovable object".



neodragzero said:


> Either provide evidence of the Q surpassing what Galactus with the UN can do or bugger off.



Bugger off yourself.

My stance is that the Q have, thus far, been shown to only be limited by other Q, so there is no way to give Galactus a decisive victory.  Does that mean the Q are victorious or does it result in stalemate?  That is the question.


----------



## Crimson Dragoon (Apr 29, 2011)

Galactus eats the Q


----------



## Cthulhu-versailles (Apr 29, 2011)

Universal+ or all doesn't have to exist for someone to be above someone else. Some "fictions" only have the universe and it represents infinte zillion-omni-multi wtv  terms you want to make up or think are needed. That's fiction! The limitations and imposed logic of one fictional universe doesn't automatically define the basis of all other fictional verses. Just as one hypothetical theory with no more basis than any other doesn't define all other theories in real life, so doth dem + - ain't blah. 

Q slaughters with powerscaling, but losses miserably from feats.


----------



## billy3 (Apr 29, 2011)

Crimson Dragoon said:


> Galactus eats the Q



I'm sure lady Q wouldn't mind.  I'm no sure if guy Q swings that way though.


----------



## Ky Hakubi (Apr 29, 2011)

billy3 said:


> Q, while human, stating the changing of the universal gravitational constant would have been a simple solution is clear indication that it would be something within his capabilities if he had his power restored.



Doesn't he actually do this at the end of the episode? He at least put the moon back in proper orbit after regaining his powers and I seem recall Geordi commenting on it after the natives gave a congrats, but I don't remember if it was stated that the gravity or anything had changed or not.


----------



## Shock Therapy (Apr 29, 2011)

billy3 said:


> Q's statement makes it clear that particular feat is within the powers of a Q.  Whether or not you accept that is your problem. Also, whether or not that feat, regardless of if it's explicit or implicit, would suffice for overpowering Galactus is a separate issue - I believe it would not, but merely goes to show that the Q's powers are quite vast.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




All i see is text. Where are the feats?

Hey did you know, I can mountain bust just by yelling. Fact. Prove me wrong, oh wai-


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Apr 29, 2011)

billy3 said:


> Can they actually harm/defeat Galactus?  Possible and debatable.



it isn't debatable what so ever they can't and do not have the feats to hang on galactus tier



billy3 said:


> Can Galactus actually harm/defeat them?  I seriously doubt so.



so you feel the Q possess greater power than a being who's solution to dealing with a multi universal reality warper is to grab some mustard and dorritos and on nom said cosmic like a fat dude at a buffet?

really? See I'm a trek fan I seen every episode with Q in it and never have i seen anything that supports this beyond statements which are not valid as evidence your wanking here



billy3 said:


> Q's statement makes it clear that particular feat is within the powers of a Q.



unless they are backed up by feats statements are invalid




billy3 said:


> Nope, the lack of explicit feats with no indicated cap/limitations just makes the match inconclusive.  The best one could argue for is a conditional victory based on hyperbole and assumption.



no see this isn't how it works the lack of explicit feats on big G's level means Q can't fucking hang with him period



billy3 said:


> ]The issue is there are no known limitations to the Q...  again, the lack of explicit feats just makes it as inconclusive as "the unstoppable force meets the unmovable object".



no the lack of high tier comic book cosmic feats from Q means he cant fucking do them and anything else is trolling



billy3 said:


> ]Bugger off yourself.



no when you make a claim using evidence of abscence debate tactic and statements as though it was an actual valid argument _you do not_ get to tell other posters anything of the sort



billy3 said:


> My stance is that the Q have, thus far, been shown to only be limited by other Q, so there is no way to give Galactus a decisive victory.  Does that mean the Q are victorious or does it result in stalemate?  That is the question.



and your wrong and galactus consistent high end showings give him the win


----------



## Gilgamesh (Apr 29, 2011)

Winny said:


> Oh, I'm not conceding. I'm simply not continuing a debate with you, since you've proven multiple times that you're not the kind of person to bother having debates with. That you actually negged me over this nonsense and assaulted my competence as a Mod is proof of your immaturity, if nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nope your conceding.

I would too if all my arguments got torn apart like yours did.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Apr 29, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> They went into kung-fu DBZ ki blast fighting poses. You're making stuff up.
> 
> 
> .



now I have a mental picture of guinen howling kamehameha!



Winny said:


> Just one thing - Guinan is an El-Aurian. They're exceptionally old, empathic, telepathic, they can view all of time and space _and_ they can even see into alternate timelines and universes. Q was scared of her for her knowledge, not for any ability to kill him or anything.



you realize that any canon information regarding El-Aurians is entirely speculation by the enterprise command staff and thus your essentially engaging in intentional distortions when making this claim also her "ancient race" status would of meant fuck all if Q was even a tenth as powerful as your trying to claim he is

unless your also claiming guinan can also threaten Galactus



Winny said:


> It's no different at all to why Madara was scared of Itachi, even though Itachi was clearly no match (there are a lot of examples like this in fiction, but I see no reason to drag more out). _Knowledge_ is a frightening thing.



really? Madara feared itachi for his knowledge only really? really? you mean like how right after nearly being burned alive Tobi openly admitted the only reason why itachis little fail safe failed was because itachi knew fuck all about his intangibility 

let's find a better analogy shall we? not that its at all valid any ways




Winny said:


> You _really_ seem to like to downplay pretty much everything that isn't Marvel, don't you? It's like you have some weird complex where everything said by any 'verse not called Marvel is automatically wrong because of _science_ *jazz hands*, yet the guys at Marvel can come up with the most inane crap and you'll lap it up without question.



I cannot believe I'm seeing a member of the moderation staff openly running from an argument and using a completely false mass forum biased cop out argument to do it

this is consummately unprofessional man it's atrocious behavior by any member staff or not standards



Winny said:


> The El-Aurians got their arses kicked by the Borg for the same reason every other species in the Star Trek universe - bar the Q - did. They had no way of surviving. If the Borg come after you, you're screwed. No amount of running and hiding will save you and trying to fight them is futile. Trying to say "they got owned by the Borg, so they must suck" is an absolutely ridiculous statement to make.



you mean like how the Voth a race older and more diminished than even the god damn ikonians and t'kon existed for tens of millions of years in the borgs own back yard with them being utterly helpless to assimilate them

like how joe blow kremin created a ship with blatantly superior feats to the entire borg list of appearances first contact included or how 8472 would of exterminated the borg absolutely if not for Janeways idiocy  or how future Janeway infected the borg with a virus so deadly it seems to have crippled them worse then the species that nearly eradicated them

seriously now inaccuracies bound these posts!



Winny said:


> Right, whatever. Just forget it.
> 
> Just a warning, though - _never_ question my competency as a Mod just because of a little debate like you did in that lovely little neg. This is a stupid little debate and has absolutely no bearings whatsoever on my abilities as a Mod. You went way too far with that and for that alone I'm not even bothering to continue this discussion. I despise people who actually insult my own capabilities over trivial bullshit like this.



so you invade a section you from what I can tell have no authority over what so ever outside the tournament board to debate like a regular member get caught blatantly violating the forums standards for evidence and rules and outright lying multiple times...and your reaction on being confronted with this blatant dereliction of your duties is to threaten a member of this community ? that's just glorious


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

billy3 said:


> SNIP


Statements are baseless without action. Actions speak louder than words. Either provide the action or move on. You're suggesting that a character with no shown knowledge of other fictional verses automatically knows what is and isn't ultimately possible. That makes no sense at all.

I don't care for no limits fallacies. Especially ones that still have no proof.

People who provide proof here actually have an argument. Claiming that a baseless character statement equates to a feat is a weak rhetoric with no real basis in logic.

Either provide something beyond just a character statement or you simply concede with your argument ad naseum. It's as ridiculous as the "only a sharingan user can beat a sharingan user" crap that people were foolish enough to take that seriously. Such statements aren't taken seriously when characters are utterly ignorant of other verses not under the control of their writer.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Apr 30, 2011)

you people get so defensive lol


----------



## Endless Mike (Apr 30, 2011)

What "powerscaling"? Do you even understand the concept of powerscaling? It doesn't work when there's nothing to scale _from_.

If there was something in Star Trek with better/comparable feats to Galactus and Q defeated it, had a good showing against it, or even was strongly implied to be comparable to it, then you could powerscale. But there isn't, so you can't.


----------



## Enclave (Apr 30, 2011)

Winny said:


> At their highest, they're all omnipotent. At their lowest, they simply have limitless reality warping abilities. So I see no reason why they couldn't nullify the Ultimate Nullifier, or make it turn on Galactus instead.



By Q's own admission they are NOT omnipotent.  The continuum isn't a huge fan of Humans because they're going to one day surpass the Q since Humans have a natural curiosity that the Q lack and thus Humans will not stagnate like the Q have but rather keep pushing the boundaries and never be satisfied that they know everything.

That said, the Q are freakishly powerful.  After all, Q thought it practically childsplay to alter the gravitational constant of the universe.  However I'd still give it to the big G.  After all, a super nova is enough to would/kill a Q.  That's not even close to what it would take to deal with Galactus.


----------



## Castiel (Apr 30, 2011)

This is still open?

I'm impressed.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Apr 30, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> What "powerscaling"? Do you even understand the concept of powerscaling? It doesn't work when there's nothing to scale _from_.
> 
> If there was something in Star Trek with better/comparable feats to Galactus and Q defeated it, had a good showing against it, or even was strongly implied to be comparable to it, then you could powerscale. But there isn't, so you can't.



the only things that I can recall Q doing that where impressive was the end of series episode assuming he was behind the anomaly any ways if he wasn't behind that than you have his creating an alternate life for jean luc with out making an alternate time line to do it. that's not anything Galactus would be impressed by at all 

the most impressive feats for the Q species was them affecting our universe and subspace as a side affect of their little war despite not even being in the same universe at all-mind ye they where completely unable to do this under their own personal power and needed to create weaponry to do it Galactus can do this easily with no such aid

I mean pretty much the idea that the Q are anything but mid tier cosmics is a bit silly nothing supports them being more than that and like others have said most of their feats can be replicated by heralds


----------



## Enclave (Apr 30, 2011)

The Immortal WatchDog said:


> the only things that I can recall Q doing that where impressive was the end of series episode assuming he was behind the anomaly any ways if he wasn't behind that than you have his creating an alternate life for jean luc with out making an alternate time line to do it. that's not anything Galactus would be impressed by at all



Q himself told Picard that it was Picard who caused that anomaly at the end of TNG.  Q was only responsible for Picard going through time.

So yeah, they don't even have that.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Apr 30, 2011)

Enclave said:


> Q himself told Picard that it was Picard who caused that anomaly and the end of TNG.  Q was only responsible for Picard going through time.
> 
> So yeah, they don't even have that.



thanks for the correction then damn so what they don`t top out as more than herald gl level personally? with access to some high end sci fi tech? thats it


----------



## Orochibuto (Apr 30, 2011)

While obvious the Q beign omnipotent is nonsense and wanking. I would like to clarify that I am not necessarily supported of the assumed idea that there can only be one omnipotent. Not that it changes a thing in this thread, Galactus stomps just saying.

For example what would happen if TOAA wanted to create a fully omnipotent beign? I think this kind of "there can only be 1 omnipotent" enter in the category of "What if God wanted to create a stone so heavy that not even him could lift?" or "What if God wanted to create a perfect square using the form of a circle?" the answer to these is basically: Who the fuck knows?!.

The point is I dont think the OBD should assume the closed position that there can only be 1 omnipotent, because what if said omnipotent wanted there to be more? My guess is that for that case it would have to be like the eastern philosophy of the Absolute where numerous people fully merged with the omnipotent can exist but they are still just 1 entity.

My guess is perhaps there can only be 1 omnipotent, but there may be many personalities of said omnipotent.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

The issue with your argument is that there's generally the definition that there's nothing above you when you're omnipotent. The very crux of the idea is that even if you created someone that was your virtual equal, you still win anyway. That's pretty much what true omnipotence means. Even if you create another omnipotent being, it's still not as omnipotent when you predate it, made it, and thus, as easily can destroy it anyway.

In short, make something you can't break but you break it anyway.

Omnipotence is virtually meaningless if it doesn't suggest infallibility.

That's why we don't bother with this at all and focus on feats instead. You're suggesting there's an issue with claiming there can't be more than one omnipotent for a verse but if that's what you believe, why even bother to use the word at all? The only side here suggesting the use of claimed omnipotence instead of feats is attempting to suggest that omnipotence means something absolute yet you have an entire race of this absolute. That makes no sense.

And your statement on eastern philosophy doesn't work at all. Eastern philosophy isn't just one philosophy. The only thing that comes close to what you're talking about is absolute truth but it's nothing comparable to what you're suggesting.

In short, we don't bother with the concept of omnipotent because to suggest there's more than one in one universe makes the concept utterly meaningless.


----------



## Orochibuto (Apr 30, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> The issue with your argument is that there's generally the definition that there's nothing above you when you're omnipotent. The very crux of the idea is that even if you created someone that was your virtual equal, you still win anyway. That's pretty much what true omnipotence means. Even if you create another omnipotent being, it's still not as omnipotent when you predate it, made it, *and thus, as easily can destroy it anyway.*



This is the point, if lets say an omnipotent like TOAA do an omnipotent beign and do what you say, then the omnipotent beign was never omnipotent. Thus the omnipotent failed to create another omnipotent. Dont get me wrong I am in no way claiming Q are omnipotent and I am well aware of that. Howver I do not support that it is an absolute fact that in a fiction there can only exist 1 omnipotent. 



neodragzero said:


> And your statement on eastern philosophy doesn't work at all. Eastern philosophy isn't just one philosophy. The only thing that comes close to what you're talking about is absolute truth but it's nothing comparable to what you're suggesting.



Yes there is, in some schools. For example Patanjali's, where it is described omnipotence and omniscience and omnipotence-omniscience wasnt even the highest state in fact was described as a hinderance for it would most likely create attatchment to the omnipotent power and infinite knowledgement.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

Orochibuto said:


> This is the point, if lets say an omnipotent like TOAA do an omnipotent beign and do what you say, then the omnipotent beign was never omnipotent. Thus the omnipotent failed to create another omnipotent. Dont get me wrong I am in no way claiming Q are omnipotent and I am well aware of that. Howver I do not support that it is an absolute fact that in a fiction there can only exist 1 omnipotent.


And I'm saying there's no way you can truly suggest true omnipotence to begin with. Especially when one side argues on feats while the other attempts to argue there's a race of omnipotences based off of weak character statements.


> Yes there is, in some schools. For example Patanjali's, where it is described omnipotence and omniscience and omnipotence-omniscience wasnt even the highest state in fact was described as a hinderance for it would most likely create attatchment to the omnipotent power and infinite knowledgement.


You have any link suggesting this is what Patanjali brings up at all?


----------



## Orochibuto (Apr 30, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> And I'm saying there's no way you can truly suggest true omnipotence to begin with. Especially when one side argues on feats while the other attempts to argue there's a race of omnipotences based off of weak character statements.



Then basically there is no point arguing true omnipotence at all in OBD. And yes, obviously the Q fan is just trying to win with an statement while outright ignoring feats.



neodragzero said:


> You have any link suggesting this is what Patanjali brings up at all?



Has been a long time, but it was in the sutras aroung the 40-50. Patanjali school isnt the only one. Ramalinga Swamigal does too. Yogananda does too, Sri Aurobindo does too etc.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

> Has been a long time, but it was in the sutras aroung the 40-50. Patanjali school isnt the only one. Ramalinga Swamigal does too. Yogananda does too, Sri Aurobindo does too etc.



You're suggesting we judge a definition by one set of religion out of many? We're talking about combat in general here that's utterly unrelated to the concepts of the yoga sutras you'e mentioning. How exactly does this stuff really relate to combat between fictional characters when it's based on a matter indifferent to the concept of combat? It's not usable.


----------



## Havoc (Apr 30, 2011)

Winny said:


> At their highest, they're all omnipotent. At their lowest, they simply have limitless reality warping abilities. So I see no reason why they couldn't nullify the Ultimate Nullifier, or make it turn on Galactus instead.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

I see someone likes OFWGKTA. Goblin is gonna be sweet.


----------



## Orochibuto (Apr 30, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> You're suggesting we judge a definition by one set of religion out of many? We're talking about combat in general here that's utterly unrelated to the concepts of the yoga sutras you'e mentioning. How exactly does this stuff really relate to combat between fictional characters when it's based on a matter indifferent to the concept of combat? It's not usable.



Nope not at all, I was just responding to your answer that eastern philosophies doesnt have omnipotents united in 1 beign.

Basically the point is Q gets raped yes and I agree they are by no way omnipotent, yes I agree. My issue here is the assumed OBD standard that there cant be more than 1 omnipotent in 1 fiction. I dont think this is antanswer that can be held by anyone, if 1 or 2 omnipotents of a fiction meet the rightfully extremelly strict criteria to qualify for the OBD title of omnipotent I dont see why said characters should be automatically taken out of consideration only because more than 1 character is candidate. What if I or someone else write a book of adventures where 2 characters are completely omnipotent meeting all the criteria for example? Would they be taken in the category of "Only isnanely powerful warpers" just because more than 1 exist?


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

Orochibuto said:


> Nope not at all, I was just responding to your answer that eastern philosophies doesnt have omnipotents united in 1 beign.



Again, the yoga sutras don't represent all eastern philosophy. What you bring up still doesn't encompass them all. Your comment about uniting numerous beings into an omnipotence isn't synonymous with the sutras you yourself bring up about omnipotence not being the highest level. The suggestion of a combination into one is simply something you still haven't provided from the sutras; a disconnect where you claim one thing that isn't particularly the same claim that's originally made.


> Basically the point is Q gets raped yes and I agree they are by no way omnipotent, yes I agree. My issue here is the assumed OBD standard that there cant be more than 1 omnipotent in 1 fiction. I dont think this is antanswer that can be held by anyone, if 1 or 2 omnipotents of a fiction meet the rightfully extremelly strict criteria to qualify for the OBD title of omnipotent I dont see why said characters should be automatically taken out of consideration only because more than 1 character holds is candidate. What if I or someone else write a book of adventures where 2 characters are completely omnipotent meeting all the criteria for example? Would they be taken in the category of "Only isnanely powerful warpers" just because more than 1 exist?



The claim of multiple omnipotents in one verse just doesn't really work as far as the importance of said idea. As general rules go, if you're limited in anyway, you're not omnipotent. Your own argument with the usage of the sutras doesn't work when the idea of a higher place is utterly void from the concept of combat entirely. One writer does not dictate the meaning of a word unless said writer themselves invented the concept in the first place.

The yoga sutras can't simply dictate for all of theoretical theology nor the meaning of a concept it didn't originate. Just like how one author with two so-called omnipotents does not dictate the meaning of said concept at all. To suggest there's more than one just makes the concept utterly pointless to ponder on at all. Either there's a point to it or there's none at all. If you want to argue it has a significant importance but at the same time has such a simple limit that makes it another buzz word, there's nothing to really talk about at all.


----------



## Orochibuto (Apr 30, 2011)

neodragzero said:


> Again, the yoga sutras don't represent all eastern philosophy. What you bring up still doesn't encompass them all. Your comment about uniting numerous beings into an omnipotence isn't synonymous with the sutras you yourself bring up about omnipotence not being the highest level. The suggestion of a combination into one is simply something you still haven't provided from the sutras; a disconnect where you claim one thing that isn't particularly the same claim that's originally made.



Oh right, then I agree with you. I thought you were saying that such a philosophy was non existant as all. Yes indeed, it does not represent all of it. If you were simply talking about general terms and not the totality then I agree.



neodragzero said:


> The claim of multiple omnipotents in one verse just doesn't really work as far as the importance of said idea. As general rules go, if you're limited in anyway, you're not omnipotent. Your own argument with the usage of the sutras doesn't work when the idea of a higher place is utterly void from the concept of combat entirely. One writer does not dictate the meaning of a word unless said writer themselves invented the concept in the first place.
> 
> The yoga sutras can't simply dictate for all of theoretical theology nor the meaning of a concept it didn't originate. Just like how one author with two so-called omnipotents does not dictate the meaning of said concept at all. To suggest there's more than one just makes the concept utterly pointless to ponder on at all. Either there's a point to it or there's none at all. If you want to argue it has a significant importance but at the same time has such a simple limit that makes it another buzz word, there's nothing to really talk about at all.



I am not using the sutras here at all. I am here refering to fiction works for example comics. I just think that limiting the term to 1 entity isnt necessarily an absolute fact about the term. I think you are trying to say is that omnipotence applied to 2 beigns in fiction is more than impossible, unsuitable or fucking hard to classify by OBD standards, right?

I think that everyone should decide themselves if in a fiction work there is enough evidence to claim 2 characters omnipotence or not, not beign basically a rule that it is absolutely impossible for more than 1 exist. Though I think when debating about this we will eventually go nowhere, it basically resume to questions that cant be answered like "If a character is omnipotent can it create more than 1 omnipotent or an stronger beign?" Which is basically trying to answer the same as "Can an omnipotent create a rock so heavy that it cant lift"?

As to the topic: Galactus rape the Q.


----------



## neodragzero (Apr 30, 2011)

Orochibuto said:


> Oh right, then I agree with you. I thought you were saying that such a philosophy was non existant as all. Yes indeed, it does not represent all of it. If you were simply talking about general terms and not the totality then I agree.


Kay.


> I am not using the sutras here at all. I am here refering to fiction works for example comics. I just think that limiting the term to 1 entity isnt necessarily an absolute fact about the term. I think you are trying to say is that omnipotence applied to 2 beigns in fiction is more than impossible, unsuitable or fucking hard to classify by OBD standards, right?


More like it shouldn't be a used term at all if two beings in the same verse have said title. I generally see the OBD use it to describe high concept beings with feats and/or a place in a hierarchy makes their relative existence shown to be grand enough to deserve the title.


> I think that everyone should decide themselves if in a fiction work there is enough evidence to claim 2 characters omnipotence or not, not beign basically a rule that it is absolutely impossible for more than 1 exist. Though I think when debating about this we will eventually go nowhere, it basically resume to questions that can be answered like "If a character is omnipotent can it create more than 1 omnipotent or an stronger beign?" Which is basically trying to answer the same as "Can an omnipotent create a rock so heavy that it cant lift"?



I guess we could think in terms of the paradox settled to more a down to earth limitation. The gist of that is having one character limited by another character at all, within the bounds of an existence high multiversal to omniversal at the bare minimum, to disqualify said character. Keep in mind this is bothered with at all to easily enough shoot down any attempts to claim omnipotence when said character is actually opposed and even beaten by someone else at all. It's really just a title given to characters that are truly ridiculous.


----------

