The Thor Message Board >> View Post
·
Post By
Would be Watcher

Location: Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
In Reply To
Mighty_Thor

Subj: I'm done repeating myself, good nite.
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 at 04:55:46 am EST (Viewed 100 times)
Reply Subj: But Thor's bullet-proofness has been established well before his new series.
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 at 03:07:34 am EST (Viewed 7 times)




    Quote:
    I think your main point is just JIM #100 and in those RARE instances which Thor had to block bullets...remember Thor, as a rule, fight more powerful foes than thugs with machine guns, so those instances (where he had to block bullets) are rare...
     
    Let us look at your argument in another way...
     
    You say it's "suspicious" whether Thor is bulletproof or not in the past because he has been shown to have concerns against them.  And that it's not the power of the attack but the nature which is at the crux of the issue (hence Thor can shrug off lasers and nuclear blasts, but not bullets) ....  Would that be a fair summary of your position?
     
    If that is your point...what about those other instances which Thor has blocked lasers, and has shown concern against punches by powerful foes?  We know he can take them (from various examples).  But since he blocked them, does that mean Thor is also not laser-proof?  But we know he is durable enough to withstand conventional lasers, has been to the sun, and can survive the harsh cold environment of space.  But at some point or another, in the past, writers have written him to have some concerns against them.  Would that, in itself, prove that in the past Thor is somehow not laser-proof, or that he can somehow not be durable enough to take on hulk-level punches?
     
    The point is ridiculous.
     
    I can accept the idea that Thor is not bulletproof, if in the past, it was explicitly stated that a bullet is one of his weaknesses.  If that's the case, then i can accept that the other high-end showings of Thor (nuclear blasts, lasers, etc) are irrelevant.  But the thing is, there is no such thing.  It's like Superman, other conventional weapons will not harm him, but throw a kryptonite rock at him, he is pudding.  In that case, other high-end conventional attacks are irrelevant, because we are talking about his weakness to kryptonite.  With Thor, there is no such limitation established.  You just have JIM#100 showing Thor at one time chose to flee from cops shooting at him (which I have already told you, he seemed more puzzled why they were shooting at him, than concern from bullets), which is not an evidence in itself.  It's just a vague portrayal, which establishes nothing.
     
    Meanwhile, there are concrete showings, in the past, and in the present, where Thor is bulletproof.  So, I take more stock in that, rather than some vague one panel thing.






Posted with Google Chrome 16.0.912.63 on Windows Vista
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