PhoenixColossunaut vs Superman (The Men of Steel)

@Killemall said:

@Veitha said:

@Killemall: Well, that scan shows him being able to manipulate biological matter, and then he says he can make more whales, so maybe he can create animals too. That's pretty impressive lol

Pretty inconsequential to the fight i would think, we was able to make Whale grow legs, but Whales are no where close to as durable as Superman would it work on him? Is that even a fighting feat, can he do anything more than create legs, there are so many question that can be asked. I dont think using that as a feat to suggest he would win against Superman is fair, because well frankly its not even a fighting feat.

Why durability would be even an issue?? That's biological manipulation, he made those wales grow legs, it's like he's manipulated their DNAs, he can do the same to Superman, doesn't matter how is his durability, he's still has got a DNA

@LordOfAllHumans said:

It not speculation that he can manipulate biological matter in ways contrary to their natural functions, Superman no matter how powerful is nothing but an alien and a made of biological matter, having the power to manipulate that the way Colossus showed is a viable weapon to use in a battle, same way people would include the ability of Silver Surfer or Sersi to manipulate the same kind of matter. The Phoenix manipulates everything via tk so it is a tk feat at least on the cellular level. It's completely within his power to do it, so it can be used as a feat whether he used it in battle or not Why are we to speculate that a person with a power will not be able to use that power however they see fit, without given limitations on that power? So the burden of proof would actually be on the person that says it can't be used as a viable feat, to find some kind of limitation to that power to support the claim that it's not viable just because you didn't see him use the way you would like.

I disagree, while not on the outcome of course, but the use of that feat. Just because he manipulate a whale means nothing more no less unless it is somewhere in the comics pretty clearly stated he had complete power over any life form, saying anything against that is just overestimating a feat shown on panel which i disagree. He grew legs on a whale , good and dandy, he said he could create whale without actually doing it on panel, that good too. But using that so say he manipulated Whale so he could manipulate a person who is at the least million times more durable that Superman seems odd. Its not like Superman has any connection with whale whatsoever.

Then interpreting it as a TK feat on a cellular level does make some sense, while i dont agree, it probably is just matter manipulation something Phoenix does have, as evident by bio, not sure if i have seen on panel though and frankly dont remember. But dragging a feat above and beyond what has been shown on comics is not something i approve, in a debate, we can agree or disagree but to me that is clearly insufficient proof to suggest Colossus could do anything against superman other than have few whales with legs on. I would have accept this otherwise, had Superman been less durable than a whale but its not so.

@Veitha said:

Why durability would be even an issue?? That's biological manipulation, he made those wales grow legs, it's like he's manipulated their DNAs, he can do the same to Superman, doesn't matter how is his durability, he's still has got a DNA

See thats where i disagree firstly i do not recall there ever been a statement about it being him manipulating their DNA, isnt that a speculation you are making? Secondly, there really isnt any connection between Superman DNA or durability with the Whale nor is there any connection with Superman's attribute with that of a whale. So this frankly seemed like taking a feat, and blowing the feat to level above and beyond what was actually shown on comics, which is speculation. Just because he could manipulate a whale, be it via DNA or otherwise, doesnt normally translate to suggesting he has that kind of power against Superman, thats over-hyping a feat, which i never agreed to.

I always have been a firm believer of interpreting the feat as it is shown on comics, he manipulated whales and that is all he did. Anything above and beyond that is speculation, with burden of proof lying on the person using that feat to suggest so. If asked, can you show a shed of proof that it would work on anything, regardless of durability? Is there anything remotely to suggest doesnt matter how durable you are Colossus could still manipulate your DNA, would it work on someone say as durable as Superman or lets say someone far durable than him for example: Mangog? If you say yes i would ask for a proof, if you say no there is nothing to suggest that in comics than i would say, hence the feat is insufficient to draw any sort of reasonable conclusion.

Had Superman been less durable than a whale, or had he manipulated something more durable than Superman, then it would have been a different scenario.

@Killemall said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

It not speculation that he can manipulate biological matter in ways contrary to their natural functions, Superman no matter how powerful is nothing but an alien and a made of biological matter, having the power to manipulate that the way Colossus showed is a viable weapon to use in a battle, same way people would include the ability of Silver Surfer or Sersi to manipulate the same kind of matter. The Phoenix manipulates everything via tk so it is a tk feat at least on the cellular level. It's completely within his power to do it, so it can be used as a feat whether he used it in battle or not Why are we to speculate that a person with a power will not be able to use that power however they see fit, without given limitations on that power? So the burden of proof would actually be on the person that says it can't be used as a viable feat, to find some kind of limitation to that power to support the claim that it's not viable just because you didn't see him use the way you would like.

I disagree, while not on the outcome of course, but the use of that feat. Just because he manipulate a whale means nothing more no less unless it is somewhere in the comics pretty clearly stated he had complete power over any life form, saying anything against that is just overestimating a feat shown on panel which i disagree. He grew legs on a whale , good and dandy, he said he could create whale without actually doing it on panel, that good too. But using that so say he manipulated Whale so he could manipulate a person who is at the least million times more durable that Superman seems odd. Its not like Superman has any connection with whale whatsoever.

Then interpreting it as a TK feat on a cellular level does make some sense, while i dont agree, it probably is just matter manipulation something Phoenix does have, as evident by bio, not sure if i have seen on panel though and frankly dont remember. But dragging a feat above and beyond what has been shown on comics is not something i approve, in a debate, we can agree or disagree but to me that is clearly insufficient proof to suggest Colossus could do anything against superman other than have few whales with legs on. I would have accept this otherwise, had Superman been less durable than a whale but its not so.

Whatever dude, What does durability have to do with the manipulation of cellular structures and DNA? (rhetorical I don't care what you think) The Phoenix in almost every case manipulates matter through telekinesis. I'm not going to argue with you, as you said your opinion. Your notion that a feat is not viable because you believe it needs to be used in a battle is ridiculous and hypocritical. For instance you argued that MMJ could beat Jamie Braddock because he warped the omniverse, even though you were wrong, the point is had it been true it isn't supported by any feat so it would have been noting but hyperbole (as you have a fondness for labeling anything that suits your argument) just like the insistence that he is an omniversal threat without ever actually being one, and was not used in a battle, yet it was the deciding factor for you.

We agree that Superman will not win, so let's just leave it at that, I will not be responding to anything else you post in this thread.

@LordOfAllHumans said:

Whatever dude, What does durability have to do with the manipulation of cellular structures and DNA? The Phoenix in almost every case manipulates matter through telekinesis. I'm not going to argue with you, as you said your opinion. Your notion that a feat is not viable because you believe it needs to be used in a battle is ridiculous and hypocritical. For instance you argued that MMJ could beat Jamie Braddock because he warped the omniverse, even though you were wrong, the point is had it been true it isn't supported by any feat so it would have been noting but hyperbole (as you have a fondness for labeling anything that suits your argument) just like the insistence that he is an omniversal threat without ever actually being one, and was not used in a battle, yet it was the deciding factor for you.

We agree that Superman will not win, so let's just leave it at that, I will not be responding to anything else you post in this thread.

Not sure where you misundestood me.

In regards to him being able to manipulate Superman, I am not saying he cannot, i am saying there is insufficient proof to say so and hence thats what you called a half cooked argument. And arent you making an assumption that he manipulated their DNA, or even if he did, how does that even remotely translate to him being able to manipulate Superman who is far more durable than a whale. To me its overhyping of a feat. Also i did not even use the terms hyperbole in this instance, and not sure if hyperbole has anything even remotely to do with this argument.

Secondly if you noticed MJJ vs Jamie Braddock, i said MJJ would win because they are both reality warper but the other has a feat of higher scope, rearraging and putting back the omniverse. Which was later proved false because i , shamefully so, misinterpreted a reference to an earlier story arc. The reason i used that feat is, if you can manipulate entire omniverse it shows you have greater power than a person whose feat are mostly universal. Did i ever use the fact that he was stated to be omniversal thread to suggest he would win? No. When you correct me saying that wasnt his feat, i actually agreed with you that Jamie would win, because Jamie has actually performed more impressive feat than MJJ,regardless of the hyperbole surrounding him, did i once disagree after you corrected me? I am not sure where you misunderstand me, or my stance. In MJJ vs Jamie Braddock, i was comparing the scope at which they operated, and wrongly surmised than since both there power are identical and one has operated at a higher scale MJJ would win. That is very different from what is being used here.

Here you are using one feat, performed on whale no less, then speculation that he would have exact same control over superman, which indeed is over-hyping the feat.

Phoenix Colossunaut stomps.

Colossus with the phoenix force would win .

To be fair, Glads was beaten 5v1 by the Phoenix 5...there's no evidence that he would have lost a 1v1 fight to 1/5 of the phoenix force. That's assuming that he is the metric to be used here, tho...