Jodin20723

As much as I appreciate the effort, the logic is still flawed all the same because of a general lack of PROOF. I'm not expecting to change anyone's mind here but you definitely can't expect me to believe that specific characters (goku, gohan, vegeta, etc) post cell saga are of a Skyfather level of energy projection or higher and can easily stomp characters like Galactus, Tyrant, Beyonder, Anti-monitor, The Guardians, Monarch, Imperiex, etc. Because when people say goku is "solar system or galaxy busting". A power like that is on par if not beyond what is displayed by any of these high end characters who are SHOWN to be clearly far far more powerful then anyone in dbz (including beerus and whis) combined on pure showcase alone. What blows my mind is the pure ignorance some dbz fans have of how big a solar system and galaxy is compared to earth let alone someone of human size like goku. The energy needed to literally wipe out a galaxy would need to be billions upon billions upon billions of times more powerful then any of the strongest planet busting attacks ever shown in DBZ (no exaggeration). Just to destroy our solar system alone Goku would have to be powerful enough to destroy the earth close to a million times over in order to be able to completely vaporize our sun. Funny thing is our sun is considered a "small star" compared to others within our galaxy, like Mu Cephei for example a star within our milky way galaxy that is close to 1650x larger then our sun and is also thousands of light years away. Keep in mind also that this is one star compared to the billions of other stars within our galaxy, so technically if goku was a "galaxy buster" then the simple act of destroying a planet should be so easy that he could do it with a flick of his eye lash. But again I guess common sense like that does not apply to anime and it's special rules for what is considered a canon feat. After all we only need to have Akira Toriyama just tell us that Goku is god and in essence the creator and destroyer of all and therefore can not be beaten by any flawed corporate American fictional characters. Hahaha still blows my mind how people really can think that different rules of what is considered canon apply for manga/anime compared to any traditional comic book character. But reguardless, if you choose to accept what Mr Toriyama says as a cannon showcase of true power over anything that was clearly shown in the anime or manga then have at it. Just don't expect others with common sense to believe such nonsense. Fyi this is coming from a hardcore dbz fan within myself.

@midnightdragon18: The creator confirmed what? That characters In DBZ can destroy a galaxy? Where is this SHOWN within the context of the ACTUAL SOURCE MATERIAL? I have to believe goku can destroy a galaxy because the creator tells me he can? For starters Akira Toriyama is basically a story telling novice. He changed the context of DB and DBZ so often that the story literally began to contradict itself constantly. Toriyama didn't even create half of the back story for DB and DBZ until halfway through the run of DBZ when fans began noticing all the plot holes within the story and flawed character development of alot of DBZ's major characters. That was the whole reason for the daizenshuu. Keep in mind this is not even taking into account the confusion that is the DBZ movies. Akira Toriyama is a rookie when it comes to writing a good story and in essence means alot of his statements about how powerful he believes a specific characters to be are in fact complete BS. Now this is in no way a jab at DBZ, as a matter of fact it's quite the opposite. DBZ is a very simplistic action manga/anime and I love it for that exact reason, but what bothers me is when DBZ fans hype up plot inconsistencies and hyperbole as if it's the end all be all for why goku is god. DBZ fans act like they have never heard the term PIS (plot induced stupidity) or WIS (writer induced stupidity) before. Aside from Toriyama telling you what you are supposed to believe what other concrete proof is there that goku can in fact actually destroy a galaxy? Ohh wait none, aside from the flawed dbz logic of "a specific character said he was galaxy busting and goku beat him or a being more powerful then him so that means goku is in essence galaxy busting". Funny thing about that said logic is that I can relate similar nonsense to any character. Like Monarch for example who was proven to be universe busting was defeated by Superman Prime in countdown #44. Its end result lead to the complete destruction of earth 51's universe. Now this was Superman prime who was infused with the power of the a Guardian, but this in dbz logic would make Superman prime a universe buster. Here is another one for you, Imperiex who was proven to be a galaxy buster was defeated by superman, so technically that makes Superman a galaxy buster. To add on that batman has defeated superman before on different accounts so that in turn must make batman a galaxy buster as well. Needless to say this only shows how flawed alot of DBZ fans over hyped logic is. Basically if it's not proven in the source material then he is not on that level.

@justsomerandomkid: goku was not ssj untill after the bird died. He was normal durring the entire fight prior to the bird.

@icecold14: Exactly. But the time frame of the cooler movie is inconsistent and it's not proven how much of a power increase goku may or may not have gotten after the Frieza fight to when he fought cooler. Zenkai's are specific to only near death experiences, so to assume goku got massively stronger is pure speculation. Nothing is proven in the cooler movie so it's only safe to assume that cooler while indeed is stronger then frieza, it's not exact how much stronger he is compared to frieza.

@icecold14: do explain how the goku that fought cooler is stronger? Because the cooler movies are out of continuity to the normal saga. Technically goku should be on Yardrat and not on earth fighting cooler. So because this does not follow canon continuity that was technically "the second time" goku turned ssj and was still a transformation he cannot do when he wants to. So technically his power level should be relatively consistent to what it was on Namek. Reguardless I still said cooler wins so what's the point in questioning my logic. Frieza did in fact last longer against ssj goku then Cooler did. This is fact. There is no proof to show that the ssj goku that fought cooler was stronger then the ssj that fought Frieza.

Common sense would say Cooler but Frieza did seem to last longer against ssj goku. It's would be a close battle but I am gonna go Cooler.

Batman takes this pretty easily.

Doomsday wins. Thor is out matched in this fight. Thor would definitely go out like a G though. He would put up a amazing fight and likely do exactly what superman did the first time he fought DD and at least put the beast down for a bit before he dies.

@mcdavid: That's the issue where you seem to misunderstand. Hancock and Thor's stats are not the same at all. You think they are, but the demonstration of strength, durability and speed between both characters is is vastly different. Thor gets hurt, Hancock does not, Hancock completes feats of strength and durability with relative ease while showing no exhaustion or physical harm. Thor completes feats of strength and durability but is shown to become tired over time and is proven to be harmed by a vast array of strong and weaker characters. As a matter of fact just to point out a few showcases of weakness, in Avengers Thor had trouble breaking out of a hardened glass like chamber and needed his hammer to free himself. He was also worried about falling to earth for obvious fear that the fall may kill him if not severely injure him. Hulk who was clearly stronger and more durable then Thor in Avengers showed a impressive feat when he tanked the Chitauri air whale with one punch yet when Hancock shoulder checks a train with multiple train cars attached or effortlessly throws a actual whale of similar size to the air whale an insane distance away you seem to want to discredit it because Hancock didn't "punch in his movie". I'm not saying Hancock is a better fighter then Thor, I agree that Thor shows far more experience in fighting then Hancock, but what good is it to be a better fighter when it's vastly more difficult to inflict harm on the person you are fighting? Its like a professional boxer fighting someone in a steel suit. It wasn't Thor's vast fighting skills that helped him when fighting Ironman or the Destroyer. A combination of a tornado and a mjolnir blitz took out the Destroyer and Thor's durability combined with a few hammer swings allowed him to stalemate with Ironman. It's proven that Hancock is invulnerable to physical harm, so your speculation that Hancock can be harmed by "stronger then human super powered beings" like Thor is only speculation. Especially when it's proven that Mary who stated to be stronger then Hancock couldn't even physically harm him during their fight. But hey its whatever, you are right we are just going in circles with this. So let's agree to disagree and move on. Take care as well.

@mcdavid: Hancock only had one movie, you are asking for more feats as if there is some sort of additional source material other then what exists in his one film. Then you try to show me "proof" from films I have seen 100x and own as if there was some sort of hidden information about MCU Thor that I apparently was not aware of. Again you can think what you want, I'm not trying to change your mind so much as show you that a lot of your stand points on why Thor wins are just speculative as mine for why Hancock wins. The only difference is you have 3 movies to pull from over Hancock's one. You are intentionally trying to use Hancock's limited source material (one film) as a vice to use to your advantage. I can easily say that technically Thor hasn't fought someone on Hancock or Mary's level of strength and durability, I can say that The Destroyer armor, Frost giants, Loki, Iron Man, the Chitauri, Kurse, Maliketh, etc all are relatively "featless" or at least have preformed feats on a level far far below what Hancock has shown in one film. So to call them "Super powered" is quite a stretch when compared to what Hancock has shown. I don't feel you are bias so much as you are applying what is known in Thors comics to the unknown in the MCU. When comparing feat to feat Hancock has shown to be vastly stronger and more durable then Thor, and when it comes to speed Hancock has shown the ability to travel faster through speed blitz with out the need of a magical hammer to rely on. Hancock was shown to travel to the moon and back with ease, tank a train with minimal effort and zero damage taken, throw a person absurdly high in the sky with minimal effort and then track them and catch them. He tanked having a 18 wheeler slammed on him with zero damage taken, he took gun fire at point blank and from varied distances with zero damage taken, Threw a whale an absurd distance with minimal effort, fought Mary to a stand still with zero damage taken, he also was almost dead and healed from every wound at an incredible rate the farther he got from Mary. Bottom line is this, Hancock has show to accomplish greater feats then Thor with the littlest amount of effort and absolutely zero damage taken, and when he did take damage (only because of his proximity to Mary) he healed at a incredible rate. This shows that even if Thor does injure Hancock he will heal quickly. But again, believe what you will.