What I never understood, in the second SPIDER-MAN/SUPERMAN crossover done by John Buscema, was the scene where the Hulk is battering away at Superman while he remained motionless and unharmed. I don't see how that's possible. If the Hulk is striking with the force he's striking, there's no way Superman is NOT moving. Even if he's somehow absorbing the shock of the blows, the concrete, the earth, everything around him WOULD be moving as it couldn't possibly hold Superman in place with that kind of power impacting him. Could it?

" In book 1 of All Star Superman he is told after a recent exposure to the sun his strength had tripled and he was able to lift in advance of 200 Quintillion Tons."

And that is the main reason that I never got to buying #2 of Allstar Superman. I really don't care for making Superman that ridiculously strong. And how the hell is it that the floor didn't give way when they testing for this feet of strength?

Back to an earlier point, can anyone answer, what happens when the unstoppable (Juggernaut) meets the Immovable (Blob). Both can't be right or are we hanging on to these tantalising soundbites too much? The strongest one there is etc?

******

My belief is Blob would go flying since his are governed by science while Juggernaut is powered by magic.

And that is the main reason that I never got to buying #2 of Allstar Superman. I really don't care for making Superman that ridiculously strong. And how the hell is it that the floor didn't give way when they testing for this feet of strength?

I suppose this is one of the problems for all writers for heroes like Superman, be it in a comic, on film or in TV, how strong do you make him. His kryptonian heritage is such that he is easily more powerful than any of earths meta-humans and therefore logically he would will all too easy every time. That doesn't make for good drama so they de-power him enough so it look likes others have a chance. It is hard to quantify those with magical strength such as Captain Marvel.

Dug up a post I wrote elsewhere ... pertains to how I see Superman's power levels vis-a-vis other characters' power levels.  Somethings will be out of context but the gist will come through nonehteless, I think.

* * * * *

Neither Hulk, nor Thor, nor anyone else in Marvel commonly achieves feats above 100 tons, afaict. It just hardly, if ever, happens; and I judge characters by what they are most typically shown to do by any given author: If all an author has a character do is lift 100 pound bags of flour, then I say that's the ballpark that author puts that character in. If that author has that character struggle with 100 pounds of flour, then I say that's close to the limit that author has for that character. I can't go by what an author DOESN'T show and I can't assume that he sees the character's powers the same way some author who gave that character a high end depiction lo those days ago did.

For instance, I wouldn't assume that Kurt Busiek thinks Superman can destroy Earth just by giving a single shot to a guy, and getting a single shot from a guy, like the Earth Two Superman ... just because Joe Kelly wrote him like that in his Infinite Crisis tie-in. I can't assume that Busiek thinks Superman can palm a black hole or power an engine to move Krypton just because previous writers have shown Superman doing such things and Busiek hasn't shown that Superman CAN'T do such things. That'd be ridiculous. I can only go by what's in the books and I only feel safe making the assumption that what is shown is how Busiek, or ANY writer, sees that character. That's the most parsimonious leap of faith to make, imo, and, because of that, it's the only one I feel comfortable making. More importantly, I couldn't care less if Busiek DOES think that Superman can palm a black hole or do some other feat that Busiek hasn't put in the books ... because I only go by what's actually in the books, for reasons I explain in upcoming paragraphs.

Here's another example to chew on: No author since Hulk 126(?) has said or shown that Hulk CAN'T thunderclap an entire dimension in half, which the author of that issue depicted Hulk as capable of doing -- but does that 37 years of silence on the matter constitute 37 years of unbroken proof on it? I don't think so, otherwise you're saying that 37 years of nothing is equal to 37 years of something -- that no proof is equal to proof in favor of a one-time feat. Ridiculous. The safer bet, I think, is that no author SINCE that author thinks that Hulk can do so. That's going to inform my analysis of a character -- not what some other author since then didn't show, or meant to show, or says he would have like to have shown, etc.

I really don't care what an author says online or off a title unless it clarifies something that actually OCCURED in a book. Casey says Superman can rip a sun in half -- so what? He didn't put it in a book. Now, if Casey explains something in a book -- as he explains in my interview with him that Superman WAS in fact KO'd by that Imperiex hit in OWaW (the Parademons didn't knock him out as one infamous poster likes to claim)? I can consider that ... but some theoretical feat that never occured at all? Nope, it's no good unless I'm engaged in some debate on hypothetical "creator takes" rather than actual proof -- like "Joe Casey's 'unbeatable' Superman" vs. "Walt Simonson's 'full aspect' Orion" or somesuch cal.

So, going by those standards above, I can only conclude that, on average over the last 20 years, Hulk and Thor have operated nowhere near Superman's level. And I could care less who disagrees; nor could I care less to explain the particulars, the logic or the utility of these standards any further.

OT, but related: Everything a character does is feats ... not just lifts, but fights as well, and I give EQUAL weight to everything. So, if all character does is show up every now and then and match up with Superman, which is what Doomsday does more or less, then matching up with Superman IS the totality of that character's feats. He has no low end depictions or "100 pounds of flour" ballparks to call his ability to rise and fall in pace with Superman's average into question. So, if tapped to script that character vs. Superman in a fight -- I'd go by that totality, nothing more or less. And if asked to quantify that character's strength, i.e., to show just how much I think that character can lift, for example, I would ALSO go by that totality ... nothing more or less.

But have that character come back and rack up years of 100 pounds of flour depictions while, say, Superman is racking up feats that tilt his average towards the planetary level? No way in hell I'm depicting them as equals in their next fight. It just wouldn't make sense to me to do that. And there's no way in hell I'm quantifying that character's strength by what Superman's strength is. It just wouldn't make sense to me to do that. Whether it'd make sense to you or another writer or, uh, Stephen Hawking? I could care less, frankly.

And so it goes.

* * * * *

_FR

Onslaught had telepathic powers. The Juggernaut is unstoppable there is no * that says "Well he can be stopped if the dude is really strong." There is no other way aroun it. Just hitting him or zapping him is not going to do it. He is only vulnerble to psychic attacks.

Claremont did a story in Uncanny where Juggernaut is vulnerble to high pitched noises without his helmet. Which im still unsure about. But definately no physical attack is going to do the job.

> Onslaught had telepathic powers.

True, but he simply hit Juggernaut from Canada to New York, knocking him out.  Juggernaut was then re-knocked out with a power line, if I recall correctly.  Later, Onslaught ripped through Juggernaut's chest -- there was a gapping whole there.  That has nothing to do with telepathy ... it was a material wound.

> The Juggernaut is unstoppable there is no * that says "Well he can be stopped if the dude is really strong."

Like Beast said about it, "Unstoppable is not a scientific term" (or words to that effect).

> There is no other way aroun it. Just hitting him or zapping him is not going to do it. He is only vulnerble to psychic attacks.

Nimrod took him out with a sonic attack -- sound isn't a psychic thing, it's very much physical.  He's been hurt with fire to his eyes.  He's urrnnnffed when hit hard enough like any character.  He's feared bombs and been brought to his knees gasping with a shot from the Hulk.  When Hulk's strength was increased, Hulk stopped Juggernaut in his tracks.  Thor's Godblast actually pushed Juggernaut back. 

He's not truly unstopabble (no one is).  That's just his hyperbolic tagline.  Heck, in one of his first appearances, if I recall correctly, Cyclops pushed Juggernaut backwards using sheer leg strength and "leverage."

> Claremont did a story in Uncanny where Juggernaut is vulnerble to high pitched noises without his helmet. Which im still unsure about. But definately no physical attack is going to do the job.

Sound is a physical thing.  As is electricity, getting knocked down by Superman, being stopped by Thor, etc.  There are limits to all powers.  It's not as if, in my opinion, you could collapse the entire momentum/mass of the universe into a single point and throw it at Juggernaut and expect the guy to survive, after all.  Everyone has limits.  Even Juggernaut.

_FR

> The Juggernaut is unstoppable there is no * that says "Well he can be stopped if the dude is really strong."

Like Beast said about it, "Unstoppable is not a scientific term" (or words to that effect).

*******

Magic rules over science. 

> Magic rules over science.

And science knocked Juggernaut out twice ... then ripped a whole in his chest.

Continuity rules over all.

_FR

Yet the examples you used clearly contradict continuity.