• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

General DC Comics Discussion Thread

Transcending said:
Viewing it as sprinkles would be Low 1-C but do you have a scan?
Click to expand...
found it
main-qimg-a43ff756d757468632760ad9f4636321
 
Beyond_transcending said:
Scan said "seemed". So it's not literal. It's just how Archangels view it. And why is viewing something as sprinkles Low-1C? Sprinkles aren't even infinitely smaller.
Click to expand...
....non sequitr? the word 'seemed' has nothing to do with it not being literal. the archangels are in the silver city, thats why 2-A creation looks blurred and spangled because silver city is so much bigger
 
Last edited:
Transcending said:
Scan just says creation seemed spangled. Two issues with this-

1: It just means creation appeared to be covered with spangles, not that creation itself was spangles
Click to expand...
im not saying creation itself is spangled. im saying heaven views creation as spangled because heaven is superior to it.
Transcending said:
2: "Seemed" means it's not necessarily true- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/seem
Click to expand...
appeal to meaning? the word seemed is being used because heaven quite literally see's it as spangled from their point of view because thats what it looks like from their point of view...

Seem: give the impression of being something or having a particular quality.
Similar:
appear
appear to be
give the impression of being
look

In this context, theyre using the word seemed because it LOOKS like creation is spangled and blurred
 
Last edited:
Robo said:
im not saying creation itself is spangled. im saying heaven views creation as spangled because heaven is superior to it.
Click to expand...
Not qualitatively so. Humans see things as spangled, they aren't qualitatively superior.
Robo said:
appeal to meaning? the word seemed is being used because heaven quite literally see's it as spangled from their point of view because thats what it looks like from their point of view...
Click to expand...
I think you mean Appeal to Definition, but with the dictionary, I have established an equal alternate interpretation, so the burden would be on you to prove the word "seemed" is used here as you say.
 
Transcending said:
Scan just says creation seemed spangled. Two issues with this-

1: It just means creation appeared to be covered with spangles, not that creation itself was spangles

2: "Seemed" means it's not necessarily true- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/seem
Click to expand...
How did you even come to the conclusion that "seemed blurred and spangled" means its covered with spangles?

All it means is that the creation looked blurred and spangled. Are we really having an argument regarding semantics?
 
Transcending said:
Not qualitatively so. Humans see things as spangled, they aren't qualitatively superior.
Click to expand...
This is an awful example you're comparing with and i don't see how it relates to heaven viewing a 2-A creation as spangled at all
Transcending said:
I think you mean Appeal to Definition, but with the dictionary, I have established an equal alternate interpretation, so the burden would be on you to prove the word "seemed" is used here as you say.
Click to expand...
explained above
 
Beyond_transcending said:
That's the point, the importance of "seemed", it's not literally spangled, it just appeared to be.
Click to expand...
Its not a cat, it just appears to be one. Do you even know what "spangled" means? Its those sparkling lights below. Make an actual argument with proof rather than saying its not literal.
 
Immortalgodd said:
We are talking about appearance not their characteristics.
Click to expand...
I have plenty of analogies for that too.

As Gold looked down from his window, he saw something, something that seemed to be a tiger, but no, it was actually his Uncle in the costume of one.
Click to expand...

When Gold went to the professor's lab, the professor showed him his latest invention. A being that appeared to be a human walked out, but it was actually an android.
Click to expand...
 
As Gold looked down from his window, he saw something, something that seemed to be a tiger, but no, it was actually his Uncle in the costume of one.
Click to expand...

When Gold went to the professor's lab, the professor showed him his latest invention. A being that appeared to be a human walked out, but it was actually an android.
Click to expand...
I don't see how any of these correlate with viewing a 2-A structure as spangled. Im talking about literal universes and structures while you're bringing up the most irrelevant analogies such as tigers and humans...

This is ridiculous
 
When they used the word 'seemed' they are talking about its appearance. from heaven's point of view, the IMMENSITY of creation seemed spangled. creation is immense but heaven sees it as tiny little sparkles....this is qualitative superiority.
 
What are the current conclusions and what do we need to do here?
 
Robo said:
When they used the word 'seemed' they are talking about its appearance. from heaven's point of view, the IMMENSITY of creation seemed spangled. creation is immense but heaven sees it as tiny little sparkles....this is qualitative superiority.
Click to expand...
Seemed, so it's not literal. It's just how creation looks like from there. And why is that a qualitative superiority?
 
Last edited:
Robo said:
When they used the word 'seemed' they are talking about its appearance. from heaven's point of view, the IMMENSITY of creation seemed spangled. creation is immense but heaven sees it as tiny little sparkles....this is qualitative superiority.
Click to expand...
Again, Heaven was never stated to view creation as tiny little sparkles. It said creation appeared to be spangled, which just means creation appeared to be sparkling from Heaven. The word "appear" is objectively vague. If it was meant to be literal, "was spangled and blurred" would have been stated instead of "seemed spangled and blurred". Qualitative transcendences require explicit evidences here to count, not vague ones.
Robo said:
I don't see how any of these correlate with viewing a 2-A structure as spangled. Im talking about literal universes and structures while you're bringing up the most irrelevant analogies such as tigers and humans...
Click to expand...
Immortal brought up cats, and I presented an analogy. An analogy isn't something that is an exact equal, it's a separate case that has similarities with the original case. My analogies were presented to prove the word "seemed" is vague, and I established that. It's your job now to prove "seemed" in the context was being used literally.

The word "spangled" means "covered with spangles", which doesn't make sense literally. You are changing the wording to "Heaven saw creation as sparkles", which was not what was stated. It didn't even say creation appeared as spangles but instead spangled. There's a key difference.

Creation simply appeared to be glittering to the Archangel.
Antvasima said:
What are the current conclusions and what do we need to do here?
Click to expand...
We don't have to do anything right now since this is not the Tiering thread, but the blog for the split said Heaven was Low 1-C with the reasoning that it was stated to transcend creation, when our FAQ explicitly says statements transcendence is not grounds for any kind of superiority, and much less a qualitative one. So I just disagreed with the blog.
 
Can somebody summarise your issue of contention please? If you are arguing about our ongoing DC Comics cosmology revision, it is inappropriate to do so here.
 
Godspeed is alive in Flash one minute wars special, no explanation on how his alive after Eobard thawne snapped his neck.
 
I really need to get back to my Wonder Woman revision… but I just can’t be bothered lmao

I might make a profile for Mercy Graves in the meantime, or work on revising Zatanna or one of the street tiers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Plot Manipulation for Superboy Prime DC Comics
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
Elizio33
Elizio33
Bossbrosish
Dragon Traveler Discussion Thread
Replies
5
Views
1K
KirbyFan03
KirbyFan03
RigelBR7
DC Pre Crisis Cosmology
Replies
21
Views
4K
TokiNoOuja
TokiNoOuja
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
DC Rebirth: Simple but Large Update
Replies
19
Views
2K
Vietthai96
Vietthai96
Lilybitdun
Indie Games General Discussion Thread
6 7 8
Replies
306
Views
16K
Lilybitdun
Lilybitdun
Back
Top