• 132 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for pipxeroth
#101 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619: Sure. I'll just list the ones from your opener and not all of the ones throughout the entire debate though because that's way more time and effort than I want to spend on this. Keep in mind I'm not a Big G expert so it's possible everything I'm about to say is totally wrong.

Your hax section is fine so really it's just stuff from the destructive power section.

or starters, in Annihilation #5, he was able to cause an explosion that encompassed three star systems:

In Thanos Imperative: Ignition, however, it was retconned to be galactic in size and power:

I'm skeptical that this is actually stating that it's a galaxy sized blast. The actual statement in the scan is "The annihilation wave was obliterated and the galaxy swept clean". To me that's simply stating that his blast swept the galaxy clean of the annihilation wave, but really that's not the main thing I care about and I could easily be convinced otherwise.

The more important thing is I think the blast itself is very overrated in terms of potency. Maybe there is an argument for it being galactic in size, sure, but the way you used the feat you seemed to be suggesting it was equivalent to a true galaxy busting attack. If I'm wrong about that please let me know, but that's how I interpreted it, and I think it's disingenuous to use the feat that way. Like a couple of pages later in the issue we can see that the blast itself didn't even completely destroy the annihilation wave's ships, Annihilus survived it, and Nova survived it and protected his allies from it with a shield.

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2

And I highly doubt you would say that this means they have galaxy level durability.

So I suppose you could use this feat to show that Galactus can output really large AOE but... what would be the point of that then when the potency of the blast itself isn't that strong? It seems at worst you're misrepresenting the strength of the attack, and at best you're just throwing in a feat that doesn't really matter when you're trying to argue universal DC capabilities.

Moving on, in Cosmic Powers #6, a hungry Galactus was able to stalemate and even overwhelm Tyrant, a creature of his own creation, in a battle that destroyed galaxies:

Maybe I'm just nitpicking with this one, but the problem is this isn't the case of your standard omniscient narrator saying that galaxies were destroyed in the fight, it's actually Thanos speaking and he says "The enmity raging between them must have destroyed entire galaxies". I really do think that's a very important distinction to make note of, because Thanos is just making an assumption based off a small snippet of a fight he's watching on his screen. He doesn't actually know if they destroyed galaxies or not, he's just assuming that they did based on how powerful he believes Galactus to be. So again maybe this just sounds nitpicky because it's very likely that galaxies were destroyed in their fight, but I don't think it's fair to just outright claim it as a fact based off of Thanos saying "yeah it might have happened" (and then fail to mention that this is the case).

Despite being hungry and deprived of a real world. A hungry Galactus performs a similar feat yet again against Agomotto in the latter's dimension, where the mystic vibrations of their battle wreaks havoc across many dimensions:

I'd just like to point out that you actually didn't post the scan where it's stated their fight was causing damage across multiple dimensions, lol. I reread the scans you posted like 4 times and it confused the hell out of me until I checked the issue and saw that it was on a later page.

No Caption Provided

That's righ folks, not even their actual attacks or the clash, but merely the vibrations from it were travelling to the dimensions of the other entities of the Vishanti and wreaking havoc.

I think you're overselling this point. What exactly do you think causes surrounding damage in a clash? It's the vibrations (mostly appearing as shockwaves) from it. You seem to be suggesting that this is an insane feat because vibrations must only be 0.0001% of the attacks power or something along those lines to try and make the feat seem more impressive, and I don't think that's a very strong argument, nor a necessary one when the feat is more than good enough taking it at face value.

Galactus has also used such scales of power in combat, such as when he oneshotted a celestial, a nigh universal entity, and then went on to tank the combined power of the three of them:

Celestials are not nigh-universal in any sense barring a few extreme outliers, and these mad celestials certainly were not in this issue. Just a few pages after their combined form one shot Galan, they attack the F4. Thing tanks a blast for an extended period of time and survives unharmed, Sue blocks that blast for an extended period of time and then easily breaks through the armour of one of the celestials, Johnny with the control rod effortlessly blasts off one's arm and then survives being blasted in the back by another, and all three blast at once, breaking through Sue's shield and directly hitting every member of the F4 almost point blank, and none of them are harmed further than simply being KOd.

Now either I missed a massive amount of context to this issue or this is actually a low end feat Galan based on how the Celestials did against the F4 in this issue. Also maybe semantics but Galactus was straight up one shot by the combined Celestial. His body survived but he had to be either revived or at least woken up by Franklin. I'd hardly call that "tanking".

Which is actually quite impressive because not only were the three gods born of the energies of the expansion of the universe and the Big Crunch but can also use its power in combat:

So to be able to be capable of killing all three in gods like Galactus is explicitly painted to be is impressive in and of itself because these three gods could all-in-all tap into multiiversal amounts of energy.

I know I've talked to you about this before, but being able to use some fundamental type of energy that's present throughout the universe or multiverse does not mean they are universal or multiversal unless they are explicitly shown being able to manipulate it on that scale, which I don't recall Tenebrous and Aegis ever doing, and I find it highly unlikely that they were that powerful when Surfer survived a beating from them and then later killed both of them pretty much instantly by tapping into the Crunch himself.

If this isn't enough to show that Galactus is atleast universal in raw energy, then how about the fact that his very origin consists of universal feats? Galactus survived the destruction of the previous universe by fusing with the previous Eternity, the sentience if the universe, as well as the following Big Bang of the new universe:

Uhh Galactus was reborn in the new universe. It literally even says he was recreated in the databook that you cite immediately after this lol. This isn't an applicable feat.

Multiple universal feats right there. A last piece of evidence to support the notion that Galactus is indeed this powerful would be the fact that even databooks support Galactus being universal:

That databook also says Thanos is universal in scope. The thing is universal in scope does not equate to universal DC/Durability and whatnot. When that particular databook you're referencing (Heroic Age: Villains) talks about scope, it's just talking about where the villains can operate and effect. So for instance Absorbing Man is National (because he stays in the US) but Deadpool is interplanetary because of the shit he gets up to.Clearly that does not mean Deadpool is a planet buster who is hundreds of times more powerful than Creel. Or as another example Kang is listed as multiversal in scope, and you obviously wouldn't call him multiversal in terms of power.

Anyway, good work overall. This was a fun debate to read.

Avatar image for streak619
#102 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth:Oh man thanks a lot for hat, that helped

I'm skeptical that this is actually stating that it's a galaxy sized blast. The actual statement in the scan is "The annihilation wave was obliterated and the galaxy swept clean". To me that's simply stating that his blast swept the galaxy clean of the annihilation wave, but really that's not the main thing I care about and I could easily be convinced otherwise.

Eh, that's more of a semantical thing, I'd rather not delve into it. But I do see where you're coming from. I just think it's weird that they'd say 'swept the galaxy clean' when it wasn't like the Annihilation wave dominated an even comparable part of the galaxy. It really makes no sense they would use that scale.

The more important thing is I think the blast itself is very overrated in terms of potency. Maybe there is an argument for it being galactic in size, sure, but the way you used the feat you seemed to be suggesting it was equivalent to a true galaxy busting attack. If I'm wrong about that please let me know, but that's how I interpreted it, and I think it's disingenuous to use the feat that way. Like a couple of pages later in the issue we can see that the blast itself didn't even completely destroy the annihilation wave's ships, Annihilus survived it, and Nova survived it and protected his allies from it with a shield.

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2

And I highly doubt you would say that this means they have galaxy level durability.

Well yes, I concede that it isn't true galaxy busting in raw energy, but approaching it. I would say it wasn't a particularly potent blast that in my opinion, at least, possessed enough energy to largely fragment whatever it touched and one could justify Annihilus and Nova surviving because they tanked a astronomically tiny portion of an already not-so-potent AOE blast.

So I suppose you could use this feat to show that Galactus can output really large AOE but... what would be the point of that then when the potency of the blast itself isn't that strong? It seems at worst you're misrepresenting the strength of the attack, and at best you're just throwing in a feat that doesn't really matter when you're trying to argue universal DC capabilities

Oh yeah that was just an appetiser of sorts, to show that he can reach Galactic levels of AoE and output even while ridiculously weakened. a sort of baseline or foundations for the universal arguments, a fall back net etc.

I'd just like to point out that you actually didn't post the scan where it's stated their fight was causing damage across multiple dimensions, lol. I reread the scans you posted like 4 times and it confused the hell out of me until I checked the issue and saw that it was on a later page.

Holy shit that was stupid of me. Thanks for pointing that out man. Sorry for the inconvenience.

I think you're overselling this point. What exactly do you think causes surrounding damage in a clash? It's the vibrations (mostly appearing as shockwaves) from it. You seem to be suggesting that this is an insane feat because vibrations must only be 0.0001% of the attacks power or something along those lines to try and make the feat seem more impressive, and I don't think that's a very strong argument, nor a necessary one when the feat is more than good enough taking it at face value.

I'm gonna have to disagree here I think. I don't think that the surrounding damage is caused only by vibrations, I think when 2 beings clash and threaten all of creation it's usually because the energy outputed approaches universe busting, it certainly is potrayed as such in most of Galactus's feats. But here it was explicitly stated to be due to the vibrations, which are at best only a portion of the full power outputed, though not something like 0.001% tho, that would be ridiculous

Celestials are not nigh-universal in any sense barring a few extreme outliers, and these mad celestials certainly were not in this issue. Just a few pages after their combined form one shot Galan, they attack the F4. Thing tanks a blast for an extended period of time and survives unharmed, Sue blocks that blast for an extended period of time and then easily breaks through the armour of one of the celestials, Johnny with the control rod effortlessly blasts off one's arm and then survives being blasted in the back by another, and all three blast at once, breaking through Sue's shield and directly hitting every member of the F4 almost point blank, and none of them are harmed further than simply being KOd.

Now either I missed a massive amount of context to this issue or this is actually a low end feat Galan based on how the Celestials did against the F4 in this issue. Also maybe semantics but Galactus was straight up one shot by the combined Celestial. His body survived but he had to be either revived or at least woken up by Franklin. I'd hardly call that "tanking".

I see, I can agree with this. I initially accounted for the low showing against FF4 to be because they were jobbing of sorts since no cosmic entity really goes all out against normal folks. But yeah that was a bad argument.

I know I've talked to you about this before, but being able to use some fundamental type of energy that's present throughout the universe or multiverse does not mean they are universal or multiversal unless they are explicitly shown being able to manipulate it on that scale, which I don't recall Tenebrous and Aegis ever doing, and I find it highly unlikely that they were that powerful when Surfer survived a beating from them and then later killed both of them pretty much instantly by tapping into the Crunch himself

I don't think just barely surviving really proves anything unless we can verify they were going all out or close, which we can't, I also don't think Surfer tapping into it proves much since he was going to dir and all he did was use it consume them.

But I understand your point regarding the amount, though I never really said they could use all of the power of Crunch. I did say Tenebrous was universal since he is an embodiment of dark matter but that's it.

Uhh Galactus was reborn in the new universe. It literally even says he was recreated in the databook that you cite immediately after this lol. This isn't an applicable feat.

How does Galactus being reborn in the new world refute the feat? He survived the destruction of the previous universe during the process of fusing with the previous Eternity during his incubation period. But that doesn't really make the feat unreliable. If you're not convinced, it's even paraded around as a feat:

Chaos War #2
Chaos War #2

That databook also says Thanos is universal in scope. The thing is universal in scope does not equate to universal DC/Durability and whatnot. When that particular databook you're referencing (Heroic Age: Villains) talks about scope, it's just talking about where the villains can operate and effect. So for instance Absorbing Man is National (because he stays in the US) but Deadpool is interplanetary because of the shit he gets up to.Clearly that does not mean Deadpool is a planet buster who is hundreds of times more powerful than Creel. Or as another example Kang is listed as multiversal in scope, and you obviously wouldn't call him multiversal in terms of power.

Yeah,, I intended for it to be simply a piece of evidence for scale of effect only.

Anyway, good work overall. This was a fun debate to read.

Thanks man.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#103 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619: No problem

I just think it's weird that they'd say 'swept the galaxy clean' when it wasn't like the Annihilation wave dominated an even comparable part of the galaxy. It really makes no sense they would use that scale.

Well the thing is they had already dominated a huge amount of star systems and were still present in multiple different star systems at the time of the blast, so the next thing up in scale is the galaxy they're in.

Oh yeah that was just an appetiser of sorts, to show that he can reach Galactic levels of AoE and output even while ridiculously weakened. a sort of baseline or foundations for the universal arguments, a fall back net etc.

And it's absolutely fine, encouraged even, to start out with weaker feats and work your way up, but the thing is when you talk about characters having universal damage output, you generally are arguing their attacks are universal in potency, i.e. can hurt other universal beings with their attacks, not just that they can cover that much area with an attack that wont actually hurt. I just find it a really weird choice to include unless you specifically needed to show that he could cover large areas with weak attacks.

I'm gonna have to disagree here I think. I don't think that the surrounding damage is caused only by vibrations, I think when 2 beings clash and threaten all of creation it's usually because the energy outputed approaches universe busting, it certainly is potrayed as such in most of Galactus's feats. But here it was explicitly stated to be due to the vibrations, which are at best only a portion of the full power outputed, though not something like 0.001% tho, that would be ridiculous

Fair enough, maybe it just has to do with it being a difference in what we're used to reading, but most of the time in my experience when there's talk about large areas being destroyed by 2 characters clashing it's almost always because of the vibrations and not just like, universe sized explosions as you're alluding to. Maybe it just surprised you more than it did me lol.

I don't think just barely surviving really proves anything unless we can verify they were going all out or close, which we can't, I also don't think Surfer tapping into it proves much since he was going to dir and all he did was use it consume them.

But I understand your point regarding the amount, though I never really said they could use all of the power of Crunch. I did say Tenebrous was universal since he is an embodiment of dark matter but that's it.

Well it was more a case that you were bringing up how Galactus defeating them is impressive because "they could tap into multiversal amounts of energy". To me that's a bit disingenuous when someone like Surfer can also tap into that same "multiversal amount of energy".

How does Galactus being reborn in the new world refute the feat? He survived the destruction of the previous universe during the process of fusing with the previous Eternity during his incubation period.

I'm sorry but you're very, very wrong on this. He was killed in the old universe and reborn in the new one. It's pretty explicitly stated in one of the scans you posted.

No Caption Provided

The Galactus we all know and love is, physically speaking, an entirely different being to Galan of the previous universe. When the new universe was created, his ship was recreated along with it, with his new body incubating inside of it. You can find this same info in other comics that talk about his origin like Fantastic Four #262.

No Caption Provided

He never physically survived the force of the universe being destroyed or the new big bang or anything of that nature.

But that doesn't really make the feat unreliable. If you're not convinced, it's even paraded around as a feat:

I mean, Surfer can say what he wants, but the idea that Galactus is universal because he "survived" the destruction of the past universe is just not true.

Yeah,, I intended for it to be simply a piece of evidence for scale of effect only.

Eh... you're talking about Galactus being universal in terms of raw energy and then explicitly say that if those feats aren't enough, "the databooks support Galactus being universal", but that databook has absolutely nothing to do with the character's raw power and everything to do with where they can pop up and be a threat. It's one thing to use like, a datagrid from a HOTMU, but it's another entirely to misrepresent something said in an entirely different databook and parade it as being supporting evidence for Galactus being universal in raw energy. It's a very easy point for your opponent to rip apart.

Avatar image for streak619
#104 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth:

Well the thing is they had already dominated a huge amount of star systems and were still present in multiple different star systems at the time of the blast, so the next thing up in scale is the galaxy they're in.

Wasn't it just like 2-3 star systems or something?

And it's absolutely fine, encouraged even, to start out with weaker feats and work your way up, but the thing is when you talk about characters having universal damage output, you generally are arguing their attacks are universal in potency, i.e. can hurt other universal beings with their attacks, not just that they can cover that much area with an attack that wont actually hurt. I just find it a really weird choice to include unless you specifically needed to show that he could cover large areas with weak attacks.

Makes sense.

Fair enough, maybe it just has to do with it being a difference in what we're used to reading, but most of the time in my experience when there's talk about large areas being destroyed by 2 characters clashing it's almost always because of the vibrations and not just like, universe sized explosions as you're alluding to. Maybe it just surprised you more than it did me lol.

Haha maybe it did.

I'm sorry but you're very, very wrong on this. He was killed in the old universe and reborn in the new one. It's pretty explicitly stated in one of the scans you posted.

I think you're taking 'death' out of context. It's metaphorical here, it's the death of their previous identities and not their bodies. Since they did actually fuse into a new living being, they couldn't have died before they fused, otherwise they wouldn't have fused at all and would have just been destroyed along with the previous universe. All they did was fuse, Agomotto confirms this that Galactus is not some seperate or completely different entitiy from Galan in the third panel:

No Caption Provided

Would this statement not be objectively false if what you said was true?

Eh... you're talking about Galactus being universal in terms of raw energy and then explicitly say that if those feats aren't enough, "the databooks support Galactus being universal", but that databook has absolutely nothing to do with the character's raw power and everything to do with where they can pop up and be a threat. It's one thing to use like, a datagrid from a HOTMU, but it's another entirely to misrepresent something said in an entirely different databook and parade it as being supporting evidence for Galactus being universal in raw energy. It's a very easy point for your opponent to rip apart.

Well, like I said, I was using only argue scake of effect and not raw energy. Since I only argued it Galactus reached universe busting at his very strongest.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#105 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619:

Wasn't it just like 2-3 star systems or something?

Nah, I'm not sure an exact number was ever given but it was confirmed that the Annihilation wave slaughtered millions of worlds on the very first day, and if I'm not mistaken they were active for over 6 months and totally wiped out the Skrull Empire.

Annihilation: Nova #4
Annihilation: Nova #4

Now I'm not saying that this means they slaughtered millions of planets every day for over 6 months or anything, but unless it was specifically stated somewhere and I've forgotten I find it very unlikely that they only went through 2-3 star systems in total.

I think you're taking 'death' out of context. It's metaphorical here, it's the death of their previous identities and not their bodies. Since they did actually fuse into a new living being, they couldn't have died before they fused, otherwise they wouldn't have fused at all and would have just been destroyed along with the previous universe. All they did was fuse, Agomotto confirms this that Galactus is not some seperate or completely different entitiy from Galan in the third panel:

Would this statement not be objectively false if what you said was true?

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. It absolutely is a literal death and rebirth in terms of his body. He's the same entity in terms of his consciousness, but it is absolutely not the same body, that's just not even debatable when you blatantly see that he spent countless years incubating in his ship in the new universe before he was 'born'. I mean his old body didn't even tank the universe's destruction anyway, if anything you would have to argue that his ship did, but that would be utterly nonsensical because it was damaged just by crashing into a planet later. Like it said in that FF scan I posted, "But when that death gave it-self as birth to our universe, the last ship of Taa was flung out - somehow remade!" I think it's pretty clear that when Galan fused with the sentience of the universe, all that happened was his consciousness was saved, and when the new universe was created his ship carrying his new yet-to-be-born body was recreated with it.

Well, like I said, I was using only argue scake of effect and not raw energy. Since I only argued it Galactus reached universe busting at his very strongest.

Well you said "A last piece of evidence to support the notion that Galactus is indeed this powerful", when like I explained it has absolutely nothing to do with power unless you think Thanos is also universal powerwise or Kang is multiversal.

Avatar image for streak619
#106 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth:

Now I'm not saying that this means they slaughtered millions of planets every day for over 6 months or anything, but unless it was specifically stated somewhere and I've forgotten I find it very unlikely that they only went through 2-3 star systems in total.

Yeah well, millions of planets translates to atleast 1000s of stars. Since planets only exist in orbit around stars, tehy couldn't have gone about that many planets and only 2-3 star systems. But that's still pales to a galaxy which has several hundreds of billions of stars.

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. It absolutely is a literal death and rebirth in terms of his body. He's the same entity in terms of his consciousness, but it is absolutely not the same body, that's just not even debatable when you blatantly see that he spent countless years incubating in his ship in the new universe before he was 'born'.

I mean yes, the bodies pre and post incubation were certainly different but my point is, even if they were, it doesn't change much unless you're arguing an incubated Galactus cannot replicate what an unincubated Galan could, which would make no sense since Galactus is logically equal or superior. I don't believe the statement is a literal death to the body, I think it's more of a metaphor for they will no longer be or identify with what they used to be.

I mean his old body didn't even tank the universe's destruction anyway, if anything you would have to argue that his ship did, but that would be utterly nonsensical because it was damaged just by crashing into a planet later. Like it said in that FF scan I posted, "But when that death gave it-self as birth to our universe, the last ship of Taa was flung out - somehow remade!" I think it's pretty clear that when Galan fused with the sentience of the universe, all that happened was his consciousness was saved, and when the new universe was created his ship carrying his new yet-to-be-born body was recreated with it.

Like you said it was stated that the ship was remade. The intial ship that the Galan and company set out with was obviously and quite clearly destroyed, which was followed by the previous Eternity calling out to him and fusing, followed by the Big Crunch and Bang, followed by the recreation of his ship. His ship tanked nothing. The fusion of Galan and Eternity did however. An incubated and full fused and reborn Galactus should logically be able to recreate that.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#107 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619:

Yeah well, millions of planets translates to atleast 1000s of stars. Since planets only exist in orbit around stars, tehy couldn't have gone about that many planets and only 2-3 star systems. But that's still pales to a galaxy which has several hundreds of billions of stars.

You missed my point. Galaxy is up next on the scale after star system. Even if they had only gone through a very tiny percentage of the galaxy, it still sounds much better to say 'the galaxy was swept clean' rather than 'the indeterminate amount of star systems that they were currently in at the exact time of the blast were swept clean'.

I mean yes, the bodies pre and post incubation were certainly different but my point is, even if they were, it doesn't change much unless you're arguing an incubated Galactus cannot replicate what an unincubated Galan could, which would make no sense since Galactus is logically equal or superior.

I don't believe the statement is a literal death to the body, I think it's more of a metaphor for they will no longer be or identify with what they used to be.

Like you said it was stated that the ship was remade. The intial ship that the Galan and company set out with was obviously and quite clearly destroyed, which was followed by the previous Eternity calling out to him and fusing, followed by the Big Crunch and Bang, followed by the recreation of his ship. His ship tanked nothing. The fusion of Galan and Eternity did however. An incubated and full fused and reborn Galactus should logically be able to recreate that.

I really don't understand how you can see it this way. The sentience of the universe literally says they're both going to die and that they will be reborn in the new universe. I don't know where you're getting the idea that the fusion of Galan and the sentience of the universe survived anything when that's literally not shown at all. I can post your scans again and we can go through them.

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2Gallery image 3

They're on the ship, it gets incinerated and they all die except Galan who feels the sentience of the universe reach out to him, he tells Galan that they're both going to die in mere moments but they'll combine and in the new universe be reborn as Galactus, then the universe explodes. There is absolutely no indication whatsoever that Galan's body survived, and the very next thing we see is the ship recreated in the new universe with Galactus's unborn body being carried for eons. There's no indication that his original body survived, and there's no indication that literally saying "hey we're both about to die but we'll be reborn" was remotely metaphorical. And if you think that the original body did survive but accept that he has a new body now, what do you think happened to his old body? Did his consciousness transfer into the new one and he just left his old one to float in space forever?

It's a really weird stance to take and it isn't supported by any scans I've seen.

Avatar image for streak619
#108 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth:

You missed my point. Galaxy is up next on the scale after star system. Even if they had only gone through a very tiny percentage of the galaxy, it still sounds much better to say 'the galaxy was swept clean' rather than 'the indeterminate amount of star systems that they were currently in at the exact time of the blast were swept clean'.

Oh okay that makes sense. I still disagree, but I do see where you're coming from.

They're on the ship, it gets incinerated and they all die except Galan who feels the sentience of the universe reach out to him, he tells Galan that they're both going to die in mere moments but they'll combine and in the new universe be reborn as Galactus, then the universe explodes. There is absolutely no indication whatsoever that Galan's body survived, and the very next thing we see is the ship recreated in the new universe with Galactus's unborn body being carried for eons. There's no indication that his original body survived, and there's no indication that literally saying "hey we're both about to die but we'll be reborn" was remotely metaphorical. And if you think that the original body did survive but accept that he has a new body now, what do you think happened to his old body? Did his consciousness transfer into the new one and he just left his old one to float in space forever?

You're misinterpreting my stance I feel. I view his origin like this: They go to the crunch, the ship and the crew except Galan die, Eternity calls out to Galan and they fuse, survive the Big Crunch and Bang in their intial fused state and then rebuilt the space craft to then incubate to be fully reborn. Galan's body, upon fusing with Eternity, transformed into Galactus during the incubation period. Ie: It's not the he got an entirely new different body after discarding the old one, but the old body was reborn and transformed into Galactus, like how caterpillars incubate within cocoons and are reborn as butterflies, catterpillars don't discard their old body to get a new one, their old body slowly transforms into a new one which is what happened with Galan and Galactus. Galan's old body survived the Crunch and the Bang because Eternity fused with him.

What I don't understand about your stance is:

, he tells Galan that they're both going to die in mere moments but they'll combine and in the new universe be reborn as Galactus,

How could they fuse after they die? that makes no sense. If they died in the physical sense before fusing, then they would have never fused at all, how can they fuse after they've been completely destroyed? Not only would they not fuse after they die because they would not have the consciousness to fuse because consciousness exists only within the mind, which, according to you, got destroyed, nor the medium for something to physically fuse because anything physical of either of them would have been completely annihilated in the Crunch. So if you could explain that, it would help please and thanks.

Avatar image for sazzmi
#109 Posted by Sazzmi (598 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for myleftbuttcheeksolos
#110 Posted by Myleftbuttcheeksolos (408 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619: @d_aeroflame_z: holy literal wtf...lmao.

Ainz is my favorite anime character, and as much as I love him, and get a bone in my ass most times when I see streaks posts, streak gets my vote.

Aero, I'll give you that you tried your hardest to stick to your guns and did a semi decent job of cutting into some of streaks rebuttals, but his opener (damn that was good) and streak dismantling a great deal of your logic/scaling feats, left your argument for Ainz dead in the water.

Avatar image for streak619
#111 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for myleftbuttcheeksolos
#112 Posted by Myleftbuttcheeksolos (408 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619: I almost fell outta my chair reading aeros opener, there was so much just..... no.... lmao. much as I love Ainz, he doesn't belong in the same arena as big g in any way. Thank you for putting the time in to debunk the "logic" presented so folks unfamiliar with overlord won't get the wrong idea....

Avatar image for ourmanuel
#113 Posted by ourmanuel (10434 posts) - - Show Bio
Online
Avatar image for pipxeroth
#114 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619:

You're misinterpreting my stance I feel. I view his origin like this: They go to the crunch, the ship and the crew except Galan die, Eternity calls out to Galan and they fuse, survive the Big Crunch and Bang in their intial fused state and then rebuilt the space craft to then incubate to be fully reborn. Galan's body, upon fusing with Eternity, transformed into Galactus during the incubation period. Ie: It's not the he got an entirely new different body after discarding the old one, but the old body was reborn and transformed into Galactus, like how caterpillars incubate within cocoons and are reborn as butterflies, catterpillars don't discard their old body to get a new one, their old body slowly transforms into a new one which is what happened with Galan and Galactus. Galan's old body survived the Crunch and the Bang because Eternity fused with him.

That's demonstrably not true though. You can literally see that he has a new unborn body that is hooked up to some sort of artificial womb thing complete with its own little energy umbilical cord.

No Caption Provided

I might have misspoken and confused you and if so I apologise, but you're conflating his rebirth with his incubation when those are 2 different things. Here's basically the timeline of events

  • New universe is created
  • Ship carrying Galactus's unborn body is created with it and travels in space for eons
  • Ship crash lands on a planet
  • Galactus is officially 'born' as he breaks out of his artificial womb
  • Galactus goes off into space, learns how to use his powers and creates his armour
  • Galactus then transforms his ship into an incubation chamber and spends countless centuries maturing into the being we know now

All that is there on panel in Galactus Origin. Here is his birth:

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2

And then here is him after being born incubating and then emerging as Galactus

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2Gallery image 3Gallery image 4

So yeah you're right about the incubation being metamorphosis, but you're completely missing the part where he's actually reborn in the first place in a new body.

What I don't understand about your stance is:

, he tells Galan that they're both going to die in mere moments but they'll combine and in the new universe be reborn as Galactus,

How could they fuse after they die? that makes no sense. If they died in the physical sense before fusing, then they would have never fused at all, how can they fuse after they've been completely destroyed? Not only would they not fuse after they die because they would not have the consciousness to fuse because consciousness exists only within the mind, which, according to you, got destroyed, nor the medium for something to physically fuse because anything physical of either of them would have been completely annihilated in the Crunch. So if you could explain that, it would help please and thanks.

I didn't say they fused after they died, I said they fused, then died, then were reborn in the new universe as Galactus. That is explicitly what the universe's sentience explains to Galan before it all goes boom but you're trying to pass it off as metaphorical for some reason.

No Caption Provided

"But though we both must die, we need not die without an heir. Come, surrender yourself to my fiery embrace and let us become as one. Let our death throes serve as birth pangs for a new life form."

=

  • We're about to die
  • Let's fuse together
  • Now when we die and the new universe is created, we'll be reborn as Galactus

Yeah consciousness was a confusing term, originally I was going to say soul but I didn't want you to then start talking about how he technically lacks a soul because of the power cosmic. I rechecked my scans though and Thanos says that Galactus doesn't have a soul but does most likely have a spirit like Eternity/Infinity, so let's go with that then. His spirit survived, but his body absolutely did not.

Avatar image for streak619
#115 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth:

That's demonstrably not true though. You can literally see that he has a new unborn body that is hooked up to some sort of artificial womb thing complete with its own little energy umbilical cord.

Again, that doesn't irrefutably refute Galan''s body being destroyed. That unborn body could have been the fusion of Galan's body with Eternity, metamorphing Galan's body into something entirely different within the artificial womb. There is no evidence suggesting that that body was created after the Bang.

I might have misspoken and confused you and if so I apologise, but you're conflating his rebirth with his incubation when those are 2 different things. Here's basically the timeline of events

  • New universe is created
  • Ship carrying Galactus's unborn body is created with it and travels in space for eons
  • Ship crash lands on a planet
  • Galactus is officially 'born' as he breaks out of his artificial womb
  • Galactus goes off into space, learns how to use his powers and creates his armour
  • Galactus then transforms his ship into an incubation chamber and spends countless centuries maturing into the being we know now

All that is there on panel in Galactus Origin. Here is his birth:

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2

And then here is him after being born incubating and then emerging as Galactus

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2Gallery image 3Gallery image 4

So yeah you're right about the incubation being metamorphosis, but you're completely missing the part where he's actually reborn in the first place in a new body.

Thanks but the explanations following were kinda unnecessary, not only because I have know them, but because our disagreeal is fundamental and on one or two points. Whether Galactus's unbody was a new one created after the Bang or whether the unborn body is simply Galan's body + Eternity.

I didn't say they fused after they died, I said they fused, then died, then were reborn in the new universe as Galactus. That is explicitly what the universe's sentience explains to Galan before it all goes boom but you're trying to pass it off as metaphorical for some reason.

Both the literal and metaphorical are equally plausible, but I would think my interpretation makea more sense and is substantiated.

"But though we both must die, we need not die without an heir. Come, surrender yourself to my fiery embrace and let us become as one. Let our death throes serve as birth pangs for a new life form."

=

  • We're about to die
  • Let's fuse together
  • Now when we die and the new universe is created, we'll be reborn as Galactus

Yeah consciousness was a confusing term, originally I was going to say soul but I didn't want you to then start talking about how he technically lacks a soul because of the power cosmic. I rechecked my scans though and Thanos says that Galactus doesn't have a soul but does most likely have a spirit like Eternity/Infinity, so let's go with that then. His spirit survived, but his body absolutely did not

This interpretation holds if it weren't for fact that Surfer explicitly stated that Galactus survived the destruction of the previois universe as a feat to counter Thor's statement regarding Chaos King being able to destroy universes. Surfer was clearly implying Galactus would be fine. If it were indeed

Furthermore, why and how would they be reborn? That's a hole that has never been even acknowledged ever, almost as is it doesn't exist, not even the curtest explanation.

And in FF #262, Galactus's unborn body was explicitly called a survivor, in the 4th panel:

No Caption Provided

It wouldn't be a survivor if it didn't sruvive anything.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#116 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619:

Again, that doesn't irrefutably refute Galan''s body being destroyed. That unborn body could have been the fusion of Galan's body with Eternity, metamorphing Galan's body into something entirely different within the artificial womb. There is no evidence suggesting that that body was created after the Bang.

What, so you think he tanked the attack and then just somehow put himself inside an artificial womb to be born eons later with absolutely no difference? There is an enormous amount of evidence that it was a new body given every single source about his origin I can find talks about him dying and being reborn in the new universe and you're just dismissing them as being metaphorical with death.

Thanks but the explanations following were kinda unnecessary, not only because I have know them, but because our disagreeal is fundamental and on one or two points. Whether Galactus's unbody was a new one created after the Bang or whether the unborn body is simply Galan's body + Eternity.

It was necessary because you were confusing him being born again with his incubation.

Both the literal and metaphorical are equally plausible, but I would think my interpretation makea more sense and is substantiated.

Totally disagree. Your stance is utterly nonsensical and isn't backed up by a single source. There is a mountain of corroborating evidence both on panel and in databooks that he died and was recreated in the new universe in a new body, while there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any of that is supposed to be taken metaphorically, and he actually survived the universe being destroyed + the big bang then his ship was magically recreated around him with an artificial womb that apparently served no purpose whatsoever because he was already alive and the incubation was a separate thing entirely.

This interpretation holds if it weren't for fact that Surfer explicitly stated that Galactus survived the destruction of the previois universe as a feat to counter Thor's statement regarding Chaos King being able to destroy universes. Surfer was clearly implying Galactus would be fine. If it were indeed

And in FF #262, Galactus's unborn body was explicitly called a survivor, in the 4th panel:

It wouldn't be a survivor if it didn't sruvive anything.

He "survived" in the sense that he's the only being in the universe whose spirit/soul/consciousness or whatever you want to call it was part of the old universe. That does not mean his body survived.

Furthermore, why and how would they be reborn? That's a hole that has never been even acknowledged ever, almost as is it doesn't exist, not even the curtest explanation.

Lmao what? I can't tell if you're trolling or not with this, are you seriously saying "well we don't know how it happened so everything saying it happened is wrong" when we're talking about a mortal fusing with the sentient spirit of a dying universe and then turning into a universal being of energy held in the same regard as the literal concepts of Infinity and Eternity in the next universe? You're better than this, come on.

Avatar image for streak619
#117 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth:

What, so you think he tanked the attack and then just somehow put himself inside an artificial womb to be born eons later with absolutely no difference?

No, I think he tanked the destruction in his unborn form and just as the Bang took place, he then remade the ship and began incubating until he finally matured into Gakactus. So there was a difference.

There is an enormous amount of evidence that it was a new body

Which I didn't deny. What I denied was your interpretation of it. I've made this clear already.

given every single source about his origin I can find talks about him dying and being reborn in the new universe and you're just dismissing them as being metaphorical with death.

Yes. Just as much you're dismissing them as being literal.

It was necessary because you were confusing him being born again with his incubation.

No, I clearly differentiated between them. I don't think I ever made a statement that implied the incubation = reborn.

Totally disagree. Your stance is utterly nonsensical and isn't backed up by a single source.

Except for the Odin and Surfer statements which is still under contention.

There is a mountain of corroborating evidence both on panel and in databooks that he died and was recreated in the new universe in a new body, while there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any of that is supposed to be taken metaphorically

There is no evidence whatsoever supporting that it was meant to be taken literally either.

and he actually survived the universe being destroyed + the big bang then his ship was magically recreated around him

You do realise the same can be said for your stance right?

with an artificial womb that apparently served no purpose whatsoever because he was already alive and the incubation was a separate thing entirely.

?

The artificial womb-like structure could have been meant purely for the incubation process, you just baselessly assumed it was meant for the same purpose a real womb is because your stance entailed it.

He "survived" in the sense that he's the only being in the universe whose spirit/soul/consciousness or whatever you want to call it was part of the old universe. That does not mean his body survived.

Except for the context in which Surfer spoke it. Thor told him that the entire universe was at stake because the Chaos King was going to annihilate the entire universe and was implying therefore that the Chaos King was a real threat and therefore they Galactus shouldn't destroy the planet which housed all the people that were fighting the Chaos King, because if they died, he would destroy the entire universe. Surfer rebutes this comment specifically by saying Galactus survived the destruction of the previous universe, to justify Galactus destroying the planet and thus the universe's only chance of survival. Which would be a completely nonsensically misplaced comment if Galactus didn't actually survive the destruction of the universe physically, like really.

I also like how you choose the metaphorical context of 'survivor' while simultaneously calling my arguments of doing so nonsensical

Lmao what? I can't tell if you're trolling or not with this, are you seriously saying "well we don't know how it happened so everything saying it happened is wrong" when we're talking about a mortal fusing with the sentient spirit of a dying universe and then turning into a universal being of energy held in the same regard as the literal concepts of Infinity and Eternity in the next universe?

No I wasn't, I was seriously saying the fact that they haven't explained, acknowledged not even in the most curtest form that Galan and Eternity were somehow able to birth Galactus in an entirely new universe despite being annihilated completely in the previous universe.

Avatar image for just_banter
#118 Posted by Just_Banter (12352 posts) - - Show Bio

I vote for Pip, I found his arguments against the feats more convincing.

Avatar image for totallynotjucas
#119 Posted by TotallyNotJucas (578 posts) - - Show Bio

I vote for Nickzambuto.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#120 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619:

No, I think he tanked the destruction in his unborn form and just as the Bang took place, he then remade the ship and began incubating until he finally matured into Gakactus. So there was a difference.

That's not true though, this is why I made that entire section explaining how there was a difference between him being reborn and him incubating. You are either skipping over the entire section where he is in the artificial womb without any explanation, or you're conflating the time he was in there with the time he was in his incubator when I've already explained how those are blatantly different things and you said you already know that.

Yes. Just as much you're dismissing them as being literal.

Dude what are you even saying right now? The hell does "dismissing them as being literal" even mean? I'm showing stuff said on panel and you're dismissing it by saying everything he said was metaphorical. You need some kind of proof to back up your claim, and you've presented none at all.

No, I clearly differentiated between them. I don't think I ever made a statement that implied the incubation = reborn.

You're saying that the time in the artificial womb was the same as the incubation, which it wasn't. You're doing it in this very post.

Except for the Odin and Surfer statements which is still under contention.

Those don't support your argument. Every source talks about Galactus being the "sole survivor", the thing is those same sources also talk about him being recreated in the new universe, which you're just ignoring.

There is no evidence whatsoever supporting that it was meant to be taken literally either.

I want you to take a step back and think for a moment here Streak, because what you're saying right now is beyond stupid. You are literally saying that it's just as reasonable to assume that dialogue is metaphorical as it is to assume it is literal, when there is absolutely not a single piece of evidence or logic that remotely supports the idea of it being metaphorical, and that I need to prove it was literal when there is absolutely nothing in narration or on panel that contradicts it being literal.

You do realise the same can be said for your stance right?

It is far more reasonable that his body and the ship were both recreated together (like every source says they were) than what you're claiming happened.

?

The artificial womb-like structure could have been meant purely for the incubation process,

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. This is why I dumped all the scans before. It had nothing to do with the incubation. That came after he was born from the artificial womb when he went into space and modified his ship specifically for the purposes of acting as an incubator.

you just baselessly assumed it was meant for the same purpose a real womb is because your stance entailed it.

Yeah despite literally every source talking about him being born from it it's a baseless assumption, you got me. Everything the sentience said talked about him being born in the new universe. Literally the page after he comes out the narration calls him "new born". You have seen these scans, you're just ignoring what was said off of an actual baseless assumption that they're being metaphorical because it supports your view.

Except for the context in which Surfer spoke it. Thor told him that the entire universe was at stake because the Chaos King was going to annihilate the entire universe and was implying therefore that the Chaos King was a real threat and therefore they Galactus shouldn't destroy the planet which housed all the people that were fighting the Chaos King, because if they died, he would destroy the entire universe. Surfer rebutes this comment specifically by saying Galactus survived the destruction of the previous universe, to justify Galactus destroying the planet and thus the universe's only chance of survival. Which would be a completely nonsensically misplaced comment if Galactus didn't actually survive the destruction of the universe physically, like really.

So if Surfer says something your interpretation of it is true despite what's shown on panel in the actual origin story and corroborated in every databook, gotcha.

I also like how you choose the metaphorical context of 'survivor' while simultaneously calling my arguments of doing so nonsensical

It's not "metaphorical context". There is a difference between you surviving and your body surviving. If someone transferred their mind into a robot's for example and their body was destroyed, you would still say they survived. Similarly if someone was say killed by a drug that didn't physically harm their body, you wouldn't say they survived just because their body is fine. There is a clear distinction between the two.

No I wasn't, I was seriously saying the fact that they haven't explained, acknowledged not even in the most curtest form that Galan and Eternity were somehow able to birth Galactus in an entirely new universe despite being annihilated completely in the previous universe.

Welp they didn't explain or acknowledge how the sentience of the universe fused with him so I guess that didn't happen either. They didn't explain or acknowledge how the ship was recreated so I guess that didn't happen either. They didn't explain or acknowledge how his incubation worked so I guess that didn't happen either.

This argument is awful and I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you don't actually believe it and you're just trying to do whatever you can to defend your overall position right now, because I know you're better than unironically saying "it wasn't explained so it didn't happen regardless if everything says it happened".

Avatar image for Aristeaus
#121 Posted by Aristeaus (918 posts) - - Show Bio

Vote for @streak619.

This wasnt even close. Felt like reading a Naruto vs X thread.

Avatar image for streak619
#122 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth: Agree to disagree? This isn't really going anywhere. I feel like we're just repeating over and over again, I don't think I'm understanding your stance and you certainly aren't mine.

Avatar image for streak619
#123 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

Vote for @streak619.

This wasnt even close. Felt like reading a Naruto vs X thread.

Could you elaborate a bit please? Votes without a real justification aren't accepted.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#124 Posted by Pipxeroth (9120 posts) - - Show Bio

@pipxeroth: Agree to disagree? This isn't really going anywhere. I feel like we're just repeating over and over again, I don't think I'm understanding your stance and you certainly aren't mine.

Alrighty, it did go on a bit long anyway for just 1 single inconsequential point when we ended up agreeing on everything else lol.

Avatar image for streak619
#125 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio

@streak619 said:

@pipxeroth: Agree to disagree? This isn't really going anywhere. I feel like we're just repeating over and over again, I don't think I'm understanding your stance and you certainly aren't mine.

Alrighty, it did go on a bit long anyway for just 1 single inconsequential point when we ended up agreeing on everything else lol.

Haha true. Anyways, thanks a ton for humoring for so long and sharing your thoughts, definitely helped a lot. Good discussion.

Avatar image for Aristeaus
#126 Posted by Aristeaus (918 posts) - - Show Bio

@Aristeaus said:

Vote for @streak619.

This wasnt even close. Felt like reading a Naruto vs X thread.

Could you elaborate a bit please? Votes without a real justification aren't accepted.

Ok.

Firstly, Aero provided little to no actual feats. He provided a list of abilities, such as immunities, to which you addressed correctly as being in universe immunities. He then claims he did not state they would be NLF, and in his second post said

This section doesn't need to be too long, as I don't really feel like you posted anything worth me debunking, as most of them are covered by Ainz's immunities.

Completely negating his backsteps away from NLF, then he seems to reinforce them over and over again. It is simply not enough to claim X or Y without proof of X or Y.

You posted plenty of feats. The vast majority of them were not countered. He posted that he "could" do this or that, but no evidence of him doing so.

Secondly, Aero's argument rested solely on poorly thought out scaling, which you also addressed.

Out of argument ( Personal Opinion ), since you got me posting all this jazz anyway...

Reason why it felt like a Naruto vs x thread is because they scale them to absurd levels based on artistic liberties of a databook most of the time. Claiming that Ainz has infinite speed is ludicrous. He clearly does not have infinite speed, nor is he anywhere near universal.

PvP = Player vs Player. Shaltear, is not a player. Additionally, Ainz regularly loses PvP battles. It is only after he has lost once, that he is able to prepare for his opponent and then win against them. He has no knowledge of Galactus here. Additionally, Aside from Pandora, Ainz knows Shaltear better then any other NPC. Meaning he was well prepared. Using that fight as a argument is not a good one ( Streak should have picked up on these ). The Overlord class is considered quite weak in power, in fact, as it relies more on roleplaying then actual combat power.

Avatar image for streak619
#127 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for streak619
#128 Posted by Streak619 (7503 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for d_aeroflame_z
#129 Posted by D_AeroFlame_Z (315 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for ourmanuel
#130 Posted by ourmanuel (10434 posts) - - Show Bio

Jesus, the scoreboard...

Online
Avatar image for thatoneguy2958
#131 Posted by Thatoneguy2958 (152 posts) - - Show Bio

Still closed? Damn. Voting for streak.

The immunities may seem NLF, but they are immunities and as far as shown, unable to be overwhelmed. That being said, Ainz is still open to attack on so many other levels it's not even funny.

I actually had to put my phone down when I read aero's opener....scaling to infinity like that just belongs on vsbattles.

Avatar image for mylittlefascist
#132 Posted by MyLittleFascist (31452 posts) - - Show Bio

bump

Online
Avatar image for totallynotjucas
#133 Posted by TotallyNotJucas (578 posts) - - Show Bio

And I thought FTL was bad