THINK, now: Would Doomsday have killed the Batman?

[The Leaguer]

No, 'Jedi' is lame.

 

[Super Mark]

Hmmm. Excellent question, young man. No, I don't think Batman would have fought the battle the same way Superman did. As posters have said, there's NO WAY he could go fist to fist with the beast. So he would have tried to win using his smarts.

Unfortunatly, that would have taken more time. In places hundreds died, thousands may have died instead.

Still, because Bats could not hope to win in direct combat against Doomsday, he would have been forced to back off, and try to use his intelligence, science and technology to win.

In the end, yes, I suppose he would have won... but the cost (in destruction) would have been greater. And ironically, because of his lack of strength, and his lack of invulnerablity, I think he could have survived.

 

[Spade]

...Are you actually responding to yourself?

 

[Super Mark]

^ He is! He is responding to himself! ^

A) Or he's just expounding on what he was first saying, you know, would Batman have fought Doomsday the same way Superman did.

B) Either that or he's just weird.

C) Both A and B are correct.

D) None of the above.

Note that there are no other choices. Unless The Leaguer wants to put something malicious. Then he, and only he, may have an E) of his choosing.

I vote for C).

Mark

 

[CConn]

I've decided.

Batman is a race all unto his own.

 

[The Question]

I'm sorry, bu it's this kind of stuff that makes me dislike Batman fans. And I use the term fans in the same way I use it to describe the Trekkies who have Klingon weddings. I have similar sentiments for Hulk fans and Wolverine fans.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

You're joking about those Klingon weddings, right? Please, tell me you're joking.

 

[The Question]

You're joking about those Klingon weddings, right? Please, tell me you're joking.

Oh no.

They are quite real.

 

[CConn]

I'm sorry, bu it's this kind of stuff that makes me dislike Batman fans. And I use the term fans in the same way I use it to describe the Trekkies who have Klingon weddings. I have similar sentiments for Hulk fans and Wolverine fans.

Told you he was racist.

 

[Anubis]

eww

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Oh no.

They are quite real.

God, this all but confirms my father's theory about humanity.

 

[Anubis]

What would that be?

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

It's kind of...broad. Mainly predictability and willingness to go with suggestion. It goes on, but it's fairly negative.

 

[CConn]

You seem to mention negativity a lot in your posts, Mistress Gluon. Or should I say, Mistress Gloom.

 

[The Question]

It's kind of...broad. Mainly predictability and willingness to go with suggestion. It goes on, but it's fairly negative.

Well, humans can be predictable and willing to suggestion. And they are quite often, but not because it's human nature. But it's because society influences them to be so because it's what's safest for society. Nothing's more dangerous to the status quo than someone who does what no one expects him to do and listens to no one but himself. Hell, I could use that description for The Morning Star himself.

 

[Anubis]

I can't help but think the man may be right.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

You seem to mention negativity a lot in your posts, Mistress Gluon. Or should I say, Mistress Gloom.

I always come off that way when describing things. I actually have the opposite view about humans, really.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Well, humans can be predictable and willing to suggestion. And they are quite often, but not because it's human nature. But it's because society influences them to be so because it's what's safest for society. Nothing's more dangerous to the status quo than someone who does what no one expects him to do and listens to no one but himself. Hell, I could use that description for The Morning Star himself.

Actually, more or less human nature. In his theory, all "humans" (He doesn't actually go for the idea the general person is a true human, but that's a whole other argument he and I undergo from time to time) are controllable, and absolutely predictable if you have the correct information about their society. So in a way, you're right, and he's made that point more than once, but the overriding point, is that you'll find that no matter where you go in the world concerning humans.

 

[The Question]

Actually, more or less human nature. In his theory, all "humans" (He doesn't actually go for the idea the general person is a true human, but that's a whole other argument he and I undergo from time to time) are controllable, and absolutely predictable if you have the correct information about their society. So in a way, you're right, and he's made that point more than once, but the overriding point, is that you'll find that no matter where you go in the world concerning humans.

I still don't entirely agree. No one is absolutely predictable, and there are quite a few people who are completely unpredictable.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I can't help but think the man may be right.

Yes, and no.

His and my ideas about humanity are similar, but differ on a few points.

See, I think humans are controllable too, but only up to a point. And in truth, I conduct this test QUITE often on these boards. I was especially doing it in the Civil War arguments, where I would literally get people to make the points I wanted to argue against, simply by making sure they responded the way I wanted to (sorry BrianWilly, I couldn't resist. The higher the intelligence, the easier to manipulate). HOWEVER, this is where my arguments, and his arguments differ. You guys aren't dumb, and that's the overriding point he and I break off on. I say humans are gullible, even sheeplike, but eventually adapt and fix their situations given enough time and knowledge. You guys know when you're being pulled along, and you fix accordingly. You guys learn, you guys grow. He says it's unnatural for your standard run of the mill human to grow beyond their boundaries and do things like expand their mental positions, that this is reserved for our family, and those like our family (basically anybody just beyond your standard everyday human).

However, that's a lie. You guys don't sit in a rut anymore than you're forced to. You become cogs only because that's a natural part of humanity, but you're not really machines, you literally are different, and if were shifted around, would change the phases of the world around you. So you're not predicatable and controllable in the degree he thinks.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I still don't entirely agree. No one is absolutely predictable, and there are quite a few people who are completely unpredictable.

Welcome for Francoise's Observation of the Human Condition. Humans are always in a shift of change, brought on by individuals. Which means, yes, they're predictable, yes they're sometimes controllable, but it doesn't stick, you can't just change humans and solidify it, making it so that they're not absolutely controllable.

 

[Anubis]

Wow. Deep thought provoking conversation about the nature of humanity in a "Batman coulda whipped Doomsday thread" And all this from a photo of nerds at a wedding. This place never ceases to amaze me.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Eh, that's the basics of the argument. My father and I will argue over anything to extreme detail. Either way, Doomsday would kill Batman.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

God, this all but confirms my father's theory about humanity.

The concept that parents can be right can be somewhat soul chilling can't it?

 

[Anubis]

That we can certainly agree on.