Could MCU Captain America Replicate This

  • 132 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for deactivated-5c8fd6cb3e4f4
deactivated-5c8fd6cb3e4f4

18365

Forum Posts

152

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll Could MCU Captain America Replicate This (84 votes)

The bulldozer does not even budge 2%
Yeah he could pull it off with the same amount of effort 4%
Oh hell no 15%
He pushes it a tiny bit but can't replicate the full feat 23%
He does it with ease and in a shorter time frame 56%
No Caption Provided

 • 
Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Obviously not.

Avatar image for the_magister
the_magister

16019

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

No.

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for webinyoureye11
webinyoureye11

7828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The show literally said cap already bettered the feat. Unless someone can prove that cap is not strong enough to push this with actual facts and proof, then there is no reason to go against what is stated in the show.

Avatar image for amcu
Amcu

18225

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Yes. It was stated that he could do it better and I don't classify pushing something as even remotely close to lifting it.

Honestly I personally think Cap has some feats that are likely better than this.

Avatar image for payneintheass
PayneInTheAss

15202

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Honestly at this point, he could replicate half of it

Avatar image for deactivated-5c830d4e319e6
deactivated-5c830d4e319e6

4952

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Cap does it faster.

Avatar image for mainjp
MainJP

7752

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Cap replicates this with a charlie horse in his calf.

Avatar image for thebestofthebest
ThEBeStOfTheBeST

13538

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

What feats does Cap have that suggests he can do it better?

Avatar image for worldofthunder
Worldofthunder

5239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No

Avatar image for kingofwakanda
KingOfWakanda

4685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Nice trick question. As stated in the show, he does it faster.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

I dunno why people are voting no when the series explicitly had someone mention how he replicated it, but faster.

Avatar image for worldofthunder
Worldofthunder

5239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@brucerogers: How does off-screen feats suddenly count for Cap and not other characters?

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Avatar image for deactivated-5c8fd6cb3e4f4
deactivated-5c8fd6cb3e4f4

18365

Forum Posts

152

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I dunno why people are voting no when the series explicitly had someone mention how he replicated it, but faster.

off screen feats are usually the most Ludacris

  • Superman shifting tectonic plates
  • Cap doing that ^
  • Bobbi Morse fodderizing people who supposedly almost killed Hawkeye
Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#17  Edited By brucerogers

@_kingoflatveria: Except in Superman's case, we don't know how he shifted those plates. He could have used some kind of Kryptonian tech for all we know. But in Cap's case it's pretty clear that he did it due to his physicals. Even then the tectonic plate feat is many orders of magnitude above what Supes has shown on screen and thus an outlier. The bulldozer feat? not so much since falls in line of what Cap has demonstrated time and again.

I don't watch nearly enough AoS to comment on Bobbi Morse so I am going to leave that.

Avatar image for worldofthunder
Worldofthunder

5239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By Worldofthunder

@brucerogers: When did I specifically say you do that? I just asked you whether or not off-screen feats suddenly counts for Cap when it doesn't for other characters? It's off-screen. If you want to use that argument then we could label DCEU Superman as a continental-level being. Clearly that's not the case.

*EDIT* Cap's limit was clearly shown at 1,5 tons so this is clearly a good level above his strenght.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@brucerogers: When did I specifically say you do that? I just asked you whether or not off-screen feats suddenly counts for Cap when it doesn't for other characters? It's off-screen. If you want to use that argument then we could label DCEU Superman as a continental-level being. Clearly that's not the case.

Alright, apologies for jumping the gun. Though see above for my take on Supes continental 'feat'.

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@brucerogers:

not so much since falls in line of what Cap has demonstrated time and again.

Not even close. Cap's best strength feat is helicopter feat. Mike's feat alone is much better than that, let alone the fact that he supposedly did it faster.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#21  Edited By brucerogers

@rbt: Even so, the disparity between this feat and his other consistent ones is nowhere as large as the one between Superman's consistent feat and the tectonic plate one.

Though just out of curiosity, why do you think this is something Cap is incapable of replicating?

Avatar image for webinyoureye11
webinyoureye11

7828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rbt: Even so, the disparity between this feat and his other consistent ones is nowhere as large as the one between Superman's consistent feat and the tectonic plate one.

Though just out of curiosity, why do you think this is something Cap is incapable of replicating?

Yeah rbt, disprove this calc

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@brucerogers:

Even so, the disparity between this feat and his other consistent ones is nowhere as large as the one between Superman's consistent feat and the tectonic plate one.

True, but that hardly means one is more acceptable than other. The disparity is still there.

Though just out of curiosity, why do you think this is something Cap is incapable of replicating?

For one, because we've already seen Cap's upper limit of strength in movies(the helicopter feat). This feat is way beyond that. Two, its a throwaway statement from a TV show, from an unnamed source, which is not managed by people who have creative control over Cap's character. And even if we ignore all that, its very much possible that it was a statement meant to push Mike to test his limit in the training than anything else.

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0


@rbt: Even so, the disparity between this feat and his other consistent ones is nowhere as large as the one between Superman's consistent feat and the tectonic plate one.

Though just out of curiosity, why do you think this is something Cap is incapable of replicating?

Yeah rbt, disprove this calc

Why? The calc is probably right. For Mike.

Avatar image for webinyoureye11
webinyoureye11

7828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rbt said:
@webinyoureye11 said:

@rbt: Even so, the disparity between this feat and his other consistent ones is nowhere as large as the one between Superman's consistent feat and the tectonic plate one.

Though just out of curiosity, why do you think this is something Cap is incapable of replicating?

Yeah rbt, disprove this calc

Why? The calc is probably right. For Mike.

Because the same site calced caps ultron throw as much higher. About 15x better actually

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@rbt: True, but that hardly means one is more acceptable than other. The disparity is still there.

Let me put it another way, the disparity is nowhere large enough to call it an outlier.

True, but that hardly means one is more acceptable than other. The disparity is still there.

Why is this feat so much above the helicopter one?.

Two, its a throwaway statement from a TV show, from an unnamed source, which is not managed by people who have creative control over Cap's character.

Doesn't matter. It's the same universe. Comics get different writers all the time and they aren't as inconsistent as people make them out to be.

And even if we ignore all that, its very much possible that it was a statement meant to push Mike to test his limit in the training than anything else.

Well like I said, I don't watch the show to dispute this. Though unless they reveal it as such, this still remains a theory.

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rbt said:
@webinyoureye11 said:

@rbt: Even so, the disparity between this feat and his other consistent ones is nowhere as large as the one between Superman's consistent feat and the tectonic plate one.

Though just out of curiosity, why do you think this is something Cap is incapable of replicating?

Yeah rbt, disprove this calc

Why? The calc is probably right. For Mike.

Because the same site calced caps ultron throw as much higher. About 15x better actually

Then its a good thing Russos already said Cap's upper limit is helicopter feat. On his best day. Fancalcs really mean nothing. I'd know. I'm a CW Flash fan.

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@brucerogers:

Let me put it another way, the disparity is nowhere large enough to call it an outlier.

Nah, you don't get to cherry pick how much is allowed and how much isn't.

This feat is at least twice as good as what Cap's upper limit is supposed to be. There really isn't any argument here.

Avatar image for heatforce
Heatforce

8150

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@_kingoflatveria: Except in Superman's case, we don't know how he shifted those plates. He could have used some kind of Kryptonian tech for all we know. But in Cap's case it's pretty clear that he did it due to his physicals. Even then the tectonic plate feat is many orders of magnitude above what Supes has shown on screen and thus an outlier. The bulldozer feat? not so much since falls in line of what Cap has demonstrated time and again.

I don't watch nearly enough AoS to comment on Bobbi Morse so I am going to leave that.

In both cases I agree. Off screan feats should count as long as it' not hyperbole. In this case, the dude sad cap did it better. In superman's case he had a legitimate news article written about him. No krptonian tech outside of the world engine could shift a plate.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#30  Edited By brucerogers

@rbt: Nah, you don't get to cherry pick how much is allowed and how much isn't.

It's not cherry picking when the difference between the feats isn't that big. For example, 616 Spider-man lifting 30-35 tons isn't an outlier, but a high end feat. Though him beating up Firelord, is. What Cap did is the former, while what Supes did is the latter.

This feat is at least twice as good as what Cap's upper limit is supposed to be. There really isn't any argument here.

Prove it then.

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@brucerogers:

Prove it then.

What are you asking me to prove? Someone posted a calc of the feat. You can look for yourself how huge the gap is between this and helicopter feat, which is supposedly Cap's absolute peak. In fact, Russos said Cap can't even replicate the helicopter feat under normal circumstances.

Avatar image for webinyoureye11
webinyoureye11

7828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32  Edited By webinyoureye11

@rbt:

you cant prove that the tractor* feat is better though. Just saying it doesn't make it so

and even if you don't trust the exact numbers. The point is that the same site calced the feats and caps ultron throw was better. i don't even get why the tractor feat is so highly rated. It's not like he lifted it, and no one can even tell how much force was needed to push it, or why it's above what cap can do.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#33  Edited By brucerogers

@heatforce: In both cases I agree. Off screan feats should count as long as it' not hyperbole. In this case, the dude sad cap did it better. In superman's case he had a legitimate news article written about him. No krptonian tech outside of the world engine could shift a plate.

I just fronted the tech as a possibility since that is no more believable than Supes suddenly having the raw strength to do that tbh. News articles are also known for hyperbole too regardless. Even ignoring all this, it's still an outlier.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@rbt said:

@brucerogers:

Prove it then.

What are you asking me to prove? Someone posted a calc of the feat. You can look for yourself how huge the gap is between this and helicopter feat, which is supposedly Cap's absolute peak. In fact, Russos said Cap can't even replicate the helicopter feat under normal circumstances.

And you trust fan calcs, no questions asked?

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@webinyoureye11:

you cant prove that the helicopter feat is better though. Just saying it doesn't make it so

What.. I never even said helicopter feat is better. Its not. That's the whole point.

Regardless, I'm tired of repeating same thing over and over again, so I'll stop.

Avatar image for heroup2112
HeroUp2112

18402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The show literally said cap already bettered the feat. Unless someone can prove that cap is not strong enough to push this with actual facts and proof, then there is no reason to go against what is stated in the show.

Avatar image for webinyoureye11
webinyoureye11

7828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@rbt:

i meant the tractor feat. And I'm not asking for you repeat anything. I'm asking you to prove to me what makes you right About the helicopter feat being <<<< the tractor feat

Avatar image for rbt
RBT

39273

Forum Posts

1387

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38  Edited By RBT

@rbt said:

@brucerogers:

Prove it then.

What are you asking me to prove? Someone posted a calc of the feat. You can look for yourself how huge the gap is between this and helicopter feat, which is supposedly Cap's absolute peak. In fact, Russos said Cap can't even replicate the helicopter feat under normal circumstances.

And you trust fan calcs, no questions asked?

No. But its obvious which feat is better.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@rbt: Can you link me to the calc?. I gotta see this for myself.

Avatar image for heatforce
Heatforce

8150

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40  Edited By Heatforce

@heatforce: In both cases I agree. Off screan feats should count as long as it' not hyperbole. In this case, the dude sad cap did it better. In superman's case he had a legitimate news article written about him. No krptonian tech outside of the world engine could shift a plate.

I just fronted the tech as a possibility since that is no more believable than Supes suddenly having the raw strength to do that tbh. News articles are also known for hyperbole too regardless. Even ignoring all this, it's still an outlier.

Well we have the world engine feat, the tectonic plate feat, and tanking the mother box which also terraforms. There's also Zeus creating an island with his dying breath. There's enough there to say that shifting a tectonic plate isn't an outlier. Plus we even have the statement from batman about superman.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#41  Edited By brucerogers

@heatforce: What part about the World Engine feat comes close to moving tectonic plates?. The mother box feat is unquantifiable and even Cyborg tanked that. Not sure what relevance Zeus has here either.

And Batman's statement is just a statement. No different than Thor or Hulk being called more dangerous than nukes even when they aren't even nuke level.

Avatar image for heatforce
Heatforce

8150

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@heatforce: What part about the World Engine feat comes close to moving tectonic plates?. The mother box feat is unquantifiable and even Cyborg tanked that. Not sure what relevance Zeus has here either.

And Batman's statement is just a statement. No different than Thor or Hulk being calleed more dangerous than nukes even when they aren't even nuke level.

The world engine was sending a gravitational beam through opposite ends of the planet and Clark tanked the center of it. That by itself, lowballed, should be Montain level. The unity (mother boxes) have the energy to terraform a planet. Superman tanked a third of that energy (one motherbox) to kickstart his regeneration so if we lowball that should still be around continent level or more to terraform. I disagree about batman's statement being hyperbole. He knew the power in which he was dealing with. The entire line reads "The mother box was designed to reshape a planet. But what if you were stronger than a planet? If your cells were lying dormant, but incapable of decay?" Why open with "the mother box were designed to reshape a planet" if you weren't going to use it on something similar. The reason I bought up Zeus is because he also has a low tectonic feat in creating an island so there is basis for tectonic level characters.

Avatar image for tayssti
Tayssti

1330

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The show literally said cap already bettered the feat. Unless someone can prove that cap is not strong enough to push this with actual facts and proof, then there is no reason to go against what is stated in the show.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#44  Edited By brucerogers

@heatforce: The world engine was sending a gravitational beam through opposite ends of the planet and Clark tanked the center of it.

Where wasn't it shown to go clean through the planet like that?. And the best it did was caused a huge tidal wave of sorts. And even though he didn't have any visible injuries, he was still in a lot of visible discomfort and struggling to maintain his footing.

That by itself, lowballed, should be Montain level.

I don't see how, even if highballed. And even then mountain level feats are a far cry from being strong enough to move tectonic plates.

The unity (mother boxes) have the energy to terraform a planet.

Yes via manipulation. It does not cause destruction on a global scale due to brute force, if that's what you are arguing.

Superman tanked a third of that energy (one motherbox) to kickstart his regeneration so if we lowball that should still be around continent level or more to terraform.

Continental level?. Not even close. We don't even know how powerful those things are and terraforming the Earth via manipulation of the earth, elements etc is NOT the same as destroying it with brute force.

disagree about batman's statement being hyperbole. He knew the power in which he was dealing with. The entire line reads "The mother box was designed to reshape a planet. But what if you were stronger than a planet? If your cells were lying dormant, but incapable of decay?" Why open with "the mother box were designed to reshape a planet" if you weren't going to use it on something similar.

Because he is being hyperbolic and holds Superman in a very high regard?. Also, just because the mother boxes are uniquely suited to manipulate the planet does not mean they can cause physical destruction on that scale. Raw power =/= powers of manipulation. For a real world analogy, water and oxygen is known to cause steel to wear down and rust after continuous exposure. But the same cannot be said for the human skin. So does that mean that our skin is more durable than steel?. No, it just means that metals are just ill suited to withstand something that won't faze us, due to their chemical makeup.

The reason I bought up Zeus is because he also has a low tectonic feat in creating an island so there is basis for tectonic level characters.

I am sorry, but this scaling makes no sense. What Zeus did only speaks about his matter manipulation ability and does not necessarily infer raw power. Plus Superman =/= Zeus.

Avatar image for theonewhopullsthestrings
TheOneWhoPullsTheStrings

2746

Forum Posts

24

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

None of these answers fit...

Where is the 'he can move the vehicle the whole distance, but much more slowly and with a lot more effort'?

And as for the 'he already bettered it' line from the show; this seems to be what visual feats conflicting with character statements again. It could have been psyching him up for all we know. Not sure if that should count.

Avatar image for ldm
LDM

5365

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By LDM

Honestly, the Ultron throwing feat is better

Avatar image for amcu
Amcu

18225

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ldm said:

Honestly, the Ultron throwing feat is better

Agreed.

Avatar image for heatforce
Heatforce

8150

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@heatforce: The world engine was sending a gravitational beam through opposite ends of the planet and Clark tanked the center of it.

Where wasn't it shown to go clean through the planet like that?. And the best it did was caused a huge tidal wave of sorts. And even though he didn't have any visible injuries, he was still in a lot of visible discomfort and struggling to maintain his footing.

the world engine landed in the Indian Ocean while the black zero landed in metropolis, which is on the other side of the world. They worked in tandum, sending a gravitational beam through the earth. All the while, the world engine was even altering the atmosphere. This is what was weakening superman, not the gravitational beam itself, which he ultimately overcame.

That by itself, lowballed, should be Montain level.

I don't see how, even if highballed. And even then mountain level feats are a far cry from being strong enough to move tectonic plates.

see my explanation above. To send a beam that was going back and forth through opposite ends of the planet (think a game of paddle ball) would low end be mountain level.

The unity (mother boxes) have the energy to terraform a planet.

Yes via manipulation. It does not cause destruction on a global scale due to brute force, if that's what you are arguing.

not sure I understand your argument here. How does one manipulate without force? Besides, the energy required to terraform, thats what I'm in reference to. I'm not talking smashing asteroids into planets if that's the terraforming your talking about. What the world engine and to a much greater extent, the mother boxes, are capable of far greater as theorized terraforming can take hundreds if not thousands of years to accomplish a certain goal like creating an atmosphere or creating a plate tectonics, etc. The world engine and motherboxes do everything at once.

Superman tanked a third of that energy (one motherbox) to kickstart his regeneration so if we lowball that should still be around continent level or more to terraform.

Continental level?. Not even close. We don't even know how powerful those things are and terraforming the Earth via manipulation of the earth, elements etc is NOT the same as destroying it with brute force.

See above for my response to your brute force statment. To fully terraform a planet by changing its gravity, the shape of its surface, atmosphere, etc. Would take enough energy to destroy a continent or more for sure.

disagree about batman's statement being hyperbole. He knew the power in which he was dealing with. The entire line reads "The mother box was designed to reshape a planet. But what if you were stronger than a planet? If your cells were lying dormant, but incapable of decay?" Why open with "the mother box were designed to reshape a planet" if you weren't going to use it on something similar.

Because he is being hyperbolic and holds Superman in a very high regard?. Also, just because the mother boxes are uniquely suited to manipulate the planet does not mean they can cause physical destruction on that scale. Raw power =/= powers of manipulation. For a real world analogy, water and oxygen is known to cause steel to wear down and rust after continuous exposure. But the same cannot be said for the human skin. So does that mean that our skin is more durable than steel?. No, it just means that metals are just ill suited to withstand something that won't faze us, due to their chemical makeup.

then he would have said something like "the mother boxes are powerful enough to reshape a planet so maybe they can help us bring Clark back." But those weren' the words he chose to say. Batman also said in BvS that superman could kill everyone on the planet. Was that hyperbole too?

The reason I bought up Zeus is because he also has a low tectonic feat in creating an island so there is basis for tectonic level characters.

I am sorry, but this scaling makes no sense. What Zeus did only speaks about his matter manipulation ability and does not necessarily infer raw power. Plus Superman =/= Zeus.

once again, I don't understand how you separate raw power from the energy required to do something, they are one in the same. I disagree, Superman is > Zeus. Ares is about equal to Zeus (whom he killed) and Diana Killed ares, however, Superman owned not only her but ther entire JL.

Avatar image for aka_aka_aka_ak
Aka_aka_aka_ak

3573

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49  Edited By Aka_aka_aka_ak

If the breaks aren't on this probably isn't as impressive as it seems, given that strongmen frequently pull trucks and lorries. The biggest difference here is the high friction tires in the mud and the speed. He maybe can do it, but not so easily.

Avatar image for brucerogers
brucerogers

19255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#50  Edited By brucerogers

@heatforce: The world engine landed in the Indian Ocean while the black zero landed in metropolis, which is on the other side of the world. They worked in tandum, sending a gravitational beam through the earth. All the while, the world engine was even altering the atmosphere. This is what was weakening superman, not the gravitational beam itself, which he ultimately overcame.

So you are basically saying that two different engines worked together with each other on different parts of the world. How does that answer my question though?. Nowhere does this suggest that Superman is withstanding something that went clean through the planet, towards the opposite end. I am really not sure what you are trying to argue here.

see my explanation above. To send a beam that was going back and forth through opposite ends of the planet (think a game of paddle ball) would low end be mountain level.

That's not what happened. Like at all. The two engines were placed on different parts of the world and were sending gravitational beams downwards, towards the Earth. They weren't exchanging it like a game of paddle ball or whatever. It makes no sense to call it mountain level. The only thing we know is that it caused a tidal wave. That's it.

not sure I understand your argument here. How does one manipulate without force? Besides, the energy required to terraform, thats what I'm in reference to. I'm not talking smashing asteroids into planets if that's the terraforming your talking about. What the world engine and to a much greater extent, the mother boxes, are capable of far greater as theorized terraforming can take hundreds if not thousands of years to accomplish a certain goal like creating an atmosphere or creating a plate tectonics, etc. The world engine and motherboxes do everything at once.

Again, I am saying that changing something via matter/molecular/whatever manipulation is not the same as doing the same via physical force. For the sake of another example, FOX Magneto at his best has shown that he can use his powers to affect the Earth itself. But does that make him planet level in terms of physicals?

And I understood what you were talking about when you mentioned terraforming, thank you. We don't know how powerful the mother boxes are offensively since all they have shown so far is matter manipulation, so to speak.

See above for my response to your brute force statment. To fully terraform a planet by changing its gravity, the shape of its surface, atmosphere, etc. Would take enough energy to destroy a continent or more for sure.

This is a baseless assumption. You might as well argue that FOX Magneto can destroy planets via sheer force now.

then he would have said something like "the mother boxes are powerful enough to reshape a planet so maybe they can help us bring Clark back." But those weren' the words he chose to say. Batman also said in BvS that superman could kill everyone on the planet. Was that hyperbole too?

Killing everyone on the planet is a far cry from having planetary levels of physicals. Even then, that was still an educated guess. Albeit a right one.

Besides showing us how Clark can 'tank' a little bit of something that can manipulate and terraform the planet, the whole scene tells us nothing about his durability or strength.

once again, I don't understand how you separate raw power from the energy required to do something, they are one in the same. I disagree, Superman is > Zeus. Ares is about equal to Zeus (whom he killed) and Diana Killed ares, however, Superman owned not only her but ther entire JL.

See above and I really don't want to start comparing Superman to Zeus now. Either way, Zeus isn't continental either so it's a moot point.