The Thor Message Board >> View Post
·
Post By
Jonathanos

Member Since: Mon Feb 15, 2010
Posts: 2,301
In Reply To
Norvell

Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 3,786
Subj: Re: The bottom line
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 at 12:43:54 pm EST (Viewed 498 times)
Reply Subj: Re: The bottom line
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 at 09:59:42 am EST (Viewed 422 times)



    Quote:
    I'd say it's also irrelevant to include non-bullet incidents like Thor blocking spears and calling them 'deadly' -- since Thor is from a world in which such spears are deadly, and he'd have no way of gauging their lethality (e.g. a spear forged by a troll, hurled with Class 30 strength, is going to look the same as a spear forged by a mortal viking).


Meh. A spear hurled by a troll would come a lot faster than one hurled by a man and Thor's been around humans enough to know about their weapons.
If the entirety of the argument is that Thor isn't bulletproof, stop, then spears and such aren't relevant. If the larger position is that there's a quirk in his durability, then such evidence is relevant. He certainly had no problems allowing a nuclear bomb to be detonated while he stood next to it.

I began from the position of "Of course he's bulletproof." That was before I did the legwork and researched his history. I was swayed by what I saw. Still, I recognize that there are issues to support the opposite point of view.

If I saw someone insisting there was no evidence of Thor being bulletproof, I would contradict that person as well and say much as I have in this and other threads.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 4.0; on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software