@cahddz: Are you trolling me or are you just illiterate? did you read my previous posts? realistically, water would remove up to 30% of the Sub's weight. But, moving it quickly through water would return around 560% of that weightback to Aquaman's shoulders. Stay in school kid. I will be blocking you, not that it would matter since you won't be staying on the Vine for long anyway.
Oh no, it removes much more than that. The average 200 pound person only weighs about 10 poundsin water. So you're completely wrong and disproven.
@cahddz:Oh, and if you edit posts to add more shit in, please put a note that says "Edit:" Before you continue writing. It's really distasteful that you added "counters' into existing posts.
Also, water wouldn't help him build momentum. he wasn't pushing out a beach ball, he was pushing a submarine with negative buoyancy. But, i feel like explaining buoyancy to you might be a waste of time.
No thanks. The water allowed him to build the momentum he needed to push it into the air.
Please, do explain how water would help him build momentum for a submarine that had negative buoyancy at near-surface levels.
Lifting is easier when the object is submerged in water.
@cahddz:Oh, and if you edit posts to add more shit in, please put a note that says "Edit:" Before you continue writing. It's really distasteful that you added "counters' into existing posts.
Also, water wouldn't help him build momentum. he wasn't pushing out a beach ball, he was pushing a submarine with negative buoyancy. But, i feel like explaining buoyancy to you might be a waste of time.
No thanks. The water allowed him to build the momentum he needed to push it into the air.
Because if he lifted it underwater than the feat doesn't matter.
Why?
Because water takes almost all the weight away from an object.
Really? Do you really think that? Are you in any way, shape or form being serious? I can't even begin to explain why your sentence is wrong.
Any way, during the feat, the submarine was outside of the water for well over 10 feet. Making it a fully legitimate feat of lifting something without the "assistance" of water.
Because if he lifted it underwater than the feat doesn't matter.
Why?
Because water takes almost all the weight away from an object.
Really? Do you really think that? Are you in any way, shape or form being serious? I can't even begin to explain why your sentence is wrong.
Any way, during the feat, the submarine was outside of the water for well over 10 feet. Making it a fully legitimate feat of lifting something without the "assistance" of water.
It's physics, and we can still discredit it as a legitimate feat because the water allowed him to build the momentum he needed to push it into the air.
Hancock is allegedly invulnerable unless hit with something with the power of Tsar Bomba. But even this impressive level of durability still doesn't compare to this incarnation of Thor, who has literally withstood the full force of a Neutron Star. It's unlikely that Hancock has the damage output to hurt Thor, who can in turn, damage him with Stormbreaker.
Thor wins.
Thor did not stand the full force of a star. He was hit by a beam chanelled by the forge, that used the Neutron Star to power itself.
Also, he nearly died.
It was stated that he took the full force of a Neutron Star and it wasn't contradicted, so it remains a fact.
Log in to comment