Status
Not open for further replies.
It's Kara. Krypto is a Superman/Superboy thing.
Kara has Streaky, a cat.
He wasn't saying that Krypto would be with Kara. He's just wondering why Krypto hasn't made an appearance yet.

Oh dear. We just gave black kryptonite to a Brainiac.
That can't be good.
Given that he refers to Kara as his niece and OL refers to him as Jor-El I think he's the AI copy of Jor-El that tends to get stored in Clark's space shuttle.
 
Last edited:
Also, considering Brainiac's son is currently running the orange lantern corps it seems logical to me to presume that he did not, in fact, just give Brainiac black kryptonite.
 
And for those of us who don't?
From Google:
con·verse2​
ˈkänˌvərs/
noun
noun: converse; plural noun: converses
  1. 1.​
    a situation, object, or statement that is the reverse of another, or that corresponds to it but with certain terms transposed.
    "if spirituality is properly political, the converse is also true: politics is properly spiritual"
    synonyms: opposite, reverse, obverse, contrary, antithesis, other side of the coin, flip side
    "the converse is also true"
From Dictionary.com
converse2​
[adjective kuh n-vurs, kon-vurs; noun kon-vurs]
adjective
1.
opposite or contrary in direction, action, sequence, etc.; turned around.
noun
2.
something opposite or contrary.
3.
Logic.
  1. a proposition obtained from another proposition by conversion.
  2. the relation between two terms, one of which is related to the other in a given manner, as "younger than" to "older than.".
4.
a group of words correlative with a preceding group but having a significant pair of terms interchanged, as "hot in winter but cold in summer" and "cold in winter but hot in summer.".
Black kryptonite reverses morality.
So you could say someone under the influence of black K is the converse*snerk* of his usual self.
 
"And we're going to be having words later about why Match isn't in here."
That would be because someone gave said individual into the keeping of one Lex Luthor while on reasonably good terms with said industrialist then forgot to alter that arrangement when he stopped being on good terms with the Light member.

Mr Kent has neither the obligation nor the legal right to arbitrarily remove Match from Lex.
 
I think we're overlooking something.
Where's Krypto the superdog?
She's emaciated, remember? Supplies ran low and she ate him. Same thing happened to Streaky the Super Cat and Comet the Super Horse.

"It was fair! We drew straws for who would get eaten, they lost."
"...But they didn't have any opposable thumbs."
"Details, details."
 
That would be because someone gave said individual into the keeping of one Lex Luthor while on reasonably good terms with said industrialist then forgot to alter that arrangement when he stopped being on good terms with the Light member.
Mr Kent has neither the obligation nor the legal right to arbitrarily remove Match from Lex.
Superman does. Match was cloned from his tissue. Closest living adult relative, followed by Kon, who isn't an adult.
Still does; he hasn't given up any rights, and OL does not have the legal standing to decide Match's longterm treatment and disposition in the presence of known relatives.

Supes could literally walk in at any time and they would be obligated to keep him informed about his medical status and treatment, and he'd have veto status on any treatments. The fact that they did not attempt to get in contact with him while providing medical care is legally problematic, to put it lightly, especially since they know how to contact him.

It's a plot hole in canon, and one here that hopefully the author will address. Probably going to come down to muffed paperwork. Again.
As was proven with Nabu, much of the Justice League doesn't read all the reports they're given.
Added argument for a civilian permanent staff to handle bureaucracy, like in Justice League Unlimited.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily on Earth 16. Blue has an easier time maintaining healing abilities, but they don't have any magical ability to heal that the other ring types can't do as well.

Also, Alan's not here, man.

You say that as if portals or traveling far away in space in a short time was not a thing.

Has Oh El figured a way to copy Boom Tubes? Because those can get you literally to the other side of the universe in minutes
 
Last edited:
How fast/hard/far do you think an arrow fired from someone who lifted up the sky would be?
320 feet per second. The limiting factor is the bow, not the strong guy who snaps it in half overdrawing it. And if you have an indestructible infinite pull bow powered by someone who can draw it with superstrength, at that point you might as wall overhand throw railgun slugs, call it a railgun instead of a bow, and skip several steps.
 
You say that as if portals or traveling far away in space in a short time was not a thing.

Has Oh El figured a way to copy Boom Tubes? Because those can get you literally to the other side of the universe in minutes

Vril Dox II had a nearly functional prototype within, hours?, of getting his ring. It was somewhat unstable and I believe it was leaking several types of exotic radiation, but it worked.
 
While these linguistic quirks are, overall, relatively low on the tall scale of sexist things, the fact that it was not previously a sexist thing doesn't actually contribute to it being any less sexist than it "seems" in the present.
Linguistic drift is not a directed process, and that something seems sexist is the result of you (that is, the observer) ascribing intent to this process. I could say that yes, it's really horrible how men lost their unique identity, and are now just considered the unspecified rest of humanity, but that is probably not the way most consider "man as the default" sexist. I would beg you not to assume malice where there is none, and ask you instead how quickly you would grow tired of adding another syllable to the otherwise completely unambiguous word "man".

If I went to Germany, after brushing the dust off of my German, and called a young, feminist woman "Fraulein", the equivalent to Miss and Ma'am, as I was taught in school as the polite way to address a woman of uncertain civilian status, she might very well have a conniption fit because "-lein" happens to be a diminutive suffix. If I called an older, unmarried woman, grown up before this last wave of feminism, "Frau" instead of "Fraulein", she might very well be insulted by my assumption that she, as a woman past her prime, must be married, and inform me that it's "Fraulein" oder das Autobahn.

In this example, different points of view in two different persons will lead to both available options being sexist in one way or the other. I could be accused of sexism merely because some people think that they can project their opinion and experience upon others, because if they used the language like so, it would be as a deliberate insult.

In the end, language is far too complicated to be reworked every time some potentially problematic words are brought into the light, and should instead be accepted as a system built upon relics of the past, where changes should serve the interests of practicality, decreasing ambiguity and increasing ease of use. The surname conventions of Krypton could very well be a result of sexism in recent time, or it might be a relic of a hodgepodge of ancient inheritance laws being misread by a gaggle of hipster scholars, who thought they should use it because it was really retro.

An important rule of forensic anthropology is to never project your own values, beliefs or convictions upon those you study.
 
320 feet per second. The limiting factor is the bow, not the strong guy who snaps it in half overdrawing it. And if you have an indestructible infinite pull bow powered by someone who can draw it with superstrength, at that point you might as wall overhand throw railgun slugs, call it a railgun instead of a bow, and skip several steps.
320 feet per second is an International Bowhunting Organization design guideline, not a physical limitation of the bow. Modern compound bows CAN hit 400 feet per second if the archer is strong enough to actually pull it that far. So even without an indestructible bow or divine nature, someone with super strength can most certainly get faster, more powerful arrow shots than a baseline human.

Furthermore: If you HAVE a magically-reinforced bow and the strength to pull it, the bow grants you the same level of power magnification that any bow gives any archer. A strong, skilled baseline human can throw a knife at 50 feet per second, but a bow lets that same human hurl an arrow at 320 feet per second. Given this metric, how much power can the God of Archery derive from using a bow? Why would you limit yourself to just what you can throw by hand when you have TOOLS?
 
Last edited:
Linguistic drift is not a directed process, and that something seems sexist is the result of you (that is, the observer) ascribing intent to this process. I could say that yes, it's really horrible how men lost their unique identity, and are now just considered the unspecified rest of humanity, but that is probably not the way most consider "man as the default" sexist. I would beg you not to assume malice where there is none, and ask you instead how quickly you would grow tired of adding another syllable to the otherwise completely unambiguous word "man".

If I went to Germany, after brushing the dust off of my German, and called a young, feminist woman "Fraulein", the equivalent to Miss and Ma'am, as I was taught in school as the polite way to address a woman of uncertain civilian status, she might very well have a conniption fit because "-lein" happens to be a diminutive suffix. If I called an older, unmarried woman, grown up before this last wave of feminism, "Frau" instead of "Fraulein", she might very well be insulted by my assumption that she, as a woman past her prime, must be married, and inform me that it's "Fraulein" oder das Autobahn.

In this example, different points of view in two different persons will lead to both available options being sexist in one way or the other. I could be accused of sexism merely because some people think that they can project their opinion and experience upon others, because if they used the language like so, it would be as a deliberate insult.

In the end, language is far too complicated to be reworked every time some potentially problematic words are brought into the light, and should instead be accepted as a system built upon relics of the past, where changes should serve the interests of practicality, decreasing ambiguity and increasing ease of use. The surname conventions of Krypton could very well be a result of sexism in recent time, or it might be a relic of a hodgepodge of ancient inheritance laws being misread by a gaggle of hipster scholars, who thought they should use it because it was really retro.

An important rule of forensic anthropology is to never project your own values, beliefs or convictions upon those you study.
Of course, the linguistic conventions of Krypton are actually the conscious inventions of a handful of white American men from the 1950s and 60s.
 
320 feet per second is an International Bowhunting Organization design guideline, not a physical limitation of the bow. Modern compound bows CAN hit 400 feet per second if the archer is strong enough to actually pull it that far. So even without an indestructible bow or divine nature, someone with super strength can most certainly get faster, more powerful arrow shots than a baseline human.

Furthermore: If you HAVE a magically-reinforced bow and the strength to pull it, the bow grants you the same level of power magnification that any bow gives any archer. A strong, skilled baseline human can throw a knife at 50 feet per second, but a bow lets that same human hurl an arrow at 320 feet per second. Given this metric, how much power can the God of Archery derive from using a bow? Why would you limit yourself to just what you can throw by hand when you have TOOLS?

Avoiding this situation.
 
Also, super strength does not necessarily mean super speed. It doesn't matter how strong you are, you aren't going to be able to throw anything much faster than you can move your arm. A superbow bypasses that limitation, it lets you use your strength to launch a projectile at a appropriate speed, no matter how slowly you draw it.
 
Given this metric, how much power can the God of Archery derive from using a bow?
That happens not because he's super-strong and packing newtons into a tensile strength like a normal person. It's because he's the god of archery and he's holding a bow. So the answer is however many gigathaums are available to his mantle to decree forward motion into the arrow. Black Rock Shooter would use twin gatling railguns or a sword to the same effect, conjuring ammo from nowhere by the drum.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top