Beerus is a confirmed Universal Buster!!

[Polyphase Avatron]

People can reserve the right to be trusting or skeptical about any given statement if there's no proof either way. That's all I'm saying.

[Kaboom]

I'm still of the opinion that nothing is 'confirmed' until we actually see it happen.

Might as well look at the art-work and not bother reading the manga's statements -since the author's statements that he provided us (to tell a story) aren't relevant to you.

What have I already said many times about this thinly-veiled, condescending "I'm right, you're wrong and stupid, deal with it" attitude in these topics?

[Polyphase Avatron]

I wonder if H0kuten has ever read a murder/crime mystery story. With his approach of assuming every statement made is 100% truth unless it's explicitly contradicted, he'd never figure out the culprit before the story revealed it.

[rereboy]

People can reserve the right to be trusting or skeptical about any given statement if there's no proof either way. That's all I'm saying.

A right, sure, but some notions are simply not as logical and defensible as others. For example, there's no proof that the devilmite beam actually works since we never see it destroy anybody and it fails agaisnt Goku. So, I can be skeptical and argue that the devilmite beam is a technique that never works? That sounds ridiculous to me, but there's no actual proof that it works so... is it as logical as defensible as saying that the devilmite beam works? I think not.

I wonder if H0kuten has ever read a murder/crime mystery story. With his approach of assuming every statement made is 100% truth unless it's explicitly contradicted, he'd never figure out the culprit before the story revealed it.

Dragon Ball is a straightforward story, not a murder mistery, and even in murder mysteries, the reader has no reason to doubt a statement that is not contradicted in the story eventually. Just because it's a Hercule Poirot story, should we doubt that a certain character is the sister of another character when she introduces herself as such and such statement is never contradicted in the story? We don't have proof she is her sister, just a statement, should we assume it's not true even though it's not contradicted at all just because it's an Hercule Poirot story?

On that note, should we doubt Radditz is Goku's brother? We only have his statement.

EDIT: The filters prove their relevance, necessity and usefulness once again by censoring Hercule Poirot's name.

[Blackstripe]

I think Beerus can potentially destroy the universe. It's just about as much fact as him being able to destroy the Solar System. It's just, well, most people aren't nuts enough to deny him the latter considering people since Cell have been claiming they can do that much.

[Polyphase Avatron]

Why do you assume the false dichotomy of either 'accept everything as 100% true' or 'deny everything as 100% false'? There are options in-between those two extremes, you know. You can think 'Well this sounds reasonable, I guess it's probably true, whereas this sounds sketchy, I'd be hesitant to accept it without more proof, and this makes no sense at all, so I don't accept it'. Different reasons and ways to treat different statements based on things like context, consistency, in-universe logic, etc.

[h0kuten]

I'm still of the opinion that nothing is 'confirmed' until we actually see it happen.

Might as well look at the art-work and not bother reading the manga's statements -since the author's statements that he provided us (to tell a story) aren't relevant to you.

What have I already said many times about this thinly-veiled, condescending "I'm right, you're wrong and stupid, deal with it" attitude in these topics?

In no way whatsoever am I implying 'I'm right you're wrong'.

[rereboy]

Why do you assume the false dichotomy of either 'accept everything as 100% true' or 'deny everything as 100% false'?

If you are talking to me, I don't assume that. My whole point is basically that if there's a valid reason to mistrust a statement, something that might reasonably point to it being contradicted or being wrong, then it's reasonable to argue that the statement might not be trustworthy. However, when there's no valid reason or when the argument for it being untrustworthy is just a feeble one, pretty much based on conjecture rather than actual fact within the series, then mistrusting the statement based on that is illogical.

[Kamiccolo9]

In no way whatsoever am I implying 'I'm right you're wrong'.

Well, that's true at least. You're not "implying" anything.

You've said it outright.

(insert common sense here)

Lmao

Comments like these are against forum rules and completely unacceptable. Plus, nobody is going to be persuaded by posts like this. All you're doing is making yourself look like an idiot.

Great, than I'm making myself look like an idiot.

Regardless, I know I'm right.

[Polyphase Avatron]

Why do you assume the false dichotomy of either 'accept everything as 100% true' or 'deny everything as 100% false'?

If you are talking to me, I don't assume that. My whole point is basically that if there's a valid reason to mistrust a statement, something that might reasonably point to it being contradicted or being wrong, then it's reasonable to argue that the statement might not be trustworthy. However, when there's no valid reason or when the argument for it being untrustworthy is just a feeble one, pretty much based on conjecture rather than actual fact within the series, then mistrusting the statement based on that is illogical.

Some people have different standards for what they consider to be acceptable evidence. There's also the adage that 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'. For example, it's easier to believe someone when they say they can destroy a planet or solar system than if they say they can destroy the universe, because the latter is a much more extravagant claim. The fact that we've seen planets being destroyed in the series many times also proves that it's not a very uncommon or unheard-of thing, but we've never seen a universe being destroyed, or really anything close to that. So it makes perfect sense if someone wants to regard that claim with a grain of salt.

I guess my real problem here with the thread is the use of the word 'confirmed'. Nothing is 'confirmed' unless it's known to be true for sure, i.e. actually seeing it happened, or knowing for a fact that it happened. You can say it's plausible, probable, reasonable, or whatever, but it's not 'confirmed' until it actually happens. (And please no one start the idiotic "well then you must believe Master Roshi is stronger than Cell" argument or anything of that nature, because we know for a fact which characters are stronger by how their powers compare to each other in-universe. If one guy can beat up guys who beat up guys who easily beat up another guy, that also means it's 'confirmed' that the first guy is stronger).

[Hitiro]

Vegeta says he'll destroy the Earth in the Saiyan arc but apart from his line there is nothing to actually prove that he is capable of doing such a thing. Thus it is open to interpretation.

Not really, no. Considering that some characters have been able to blow up the moon for a long time and considering that there is absolutely nothing contradicting Vegeta's statement, you would have to pretty much bend yourself backwards to try to justify logically why we should disregard it as false. It's not impossible that it's false, simply because we don't see what would happen if his attack had hit the Earth, but that's hardly a solid justification to disregard what he said.

As for destroying the universe quote, it's not a matter of it being false or not, it's a matter of the quote simply not referring at all how exactly Beerus would do it. The line on itself doesn't tell us that he would charge a ki blast and, puff, there goes the whole universe in a instant.

It is entirely open to interpretation. There is nothing proving he can do it. Sure there are characters who have demonstrated moon busting but that doesn't necessarily lend to someone of his power being able to blow up the planet. Sure it is more likely he can but apart from his line there is literally no other proof he could. Thus it is easy for someone to say that he is lying or trying to make Goku fight it out with him by bluffing about that sort of thing.

I don't believe that he couldn't blow up the planet but unless we have evidence that he could then all we have are opinions. Much in the way of Cell claiming his Kamehameha has enough power to wipe out the solar system. There is no proof that what he said is true or not and that is up to the reader to decide whether he was telling the truth or not at that point. Again, personally, I feel Cell's claim was true. Like you said we have markers of characters blowing up things with much less power. Cell could probably have a battle power of a couple of billion at this point which would make a character like Vegeta from the Saiyan arc who could probably blow up Earth look like nothing.

[Polyphase Avatron]

Vegeta says he'll destroy the Earth in the Saiyan arc but apart from his line there is nothing to actually prove that he is capable of doing such a thing. Thus it is open to interpretation.

Not really, no. Considering that some characters have been able to blow up the moon for a long time and considering that there is absolutely nothing contradicting Vegeta's statement, you would have to pretty much bend yourself backwards to try to justify logically why we should disregard it as false. It's not impossible that it's false, simply because we don't see what would happen if his attack had hit the Earth, but that's hardly a solid justification to disregard what he said.

As for destroying the universe quote, it's not a matter of it being false or not, it's a matter of the quote simply not referring at all how exactly Beerus would do it. The line on itself doesn't tell us that he would charge a ki blast and, puff, there goes the whole universe in a instant.

It is entirely open to interpretation. There is nothing proving he can do it. Sure there are characters who have demonstrated moon busting but that doesn't necessarily lend to someone of his power being able to blow up the planet. Sure it is more likely he can but apart from his line there is literally no other proof he could. Thus it is easy for someone to say that he is lying or trying to make Goku fight it out with him by bluffing about that sort of thing.

I don't believe that he couldn't blow up the planet but unless we have evidence that he could then all we have are opinions. Much in the way of Cell claiming his Kamehameha has enough power to wipe out the solar system. There is no proof that what he said is true or not and that is up to the reader to decide whether he was telling the truth or not at that point. Again, personally, I feel Cell's claim was true. Like you said we have markers of characters blowing up things with much less power. Cell could probably have a battle power of a couple of billion at this point which would make a character like Vegeta from the Saiyan arc who could probably blow up Earth look like nothing.

Right. We don't know 100% for sure either way.

[h0kuten]

Beerus is Dragonball Z's first Universal buster.

[rereboy]

It is entirely open to interpretation. There is nothing proving he can do it.

It's not necessary to prove everything. Radditz doesn't actually prove he is Goku's brother. Should we doubt it? Vegeta made a statement that was consistent power-wise, that was never contradicted, and that made clear exactly how he was going to make that happen (big blast towards the Earth). It couldn't be clearer, unless you want everything to be proven with a demonstration before accepting it.

[h0kuten]

Further-more, I didn't say 'you're wrong, I'm right'

Try again.

[Hitiro]

It is entirely open to interpretation. There is nothing proving he can do it.

It's not necessary to prove everything. Radditz doesn't actually prove he is Goku's brother. Should we doubt it? Vegeta made a statement that was consistent power-wise, that was never contradicted, and that made clear exactly how he was going to make that happen (big blast towards the Earth). It couldn't be clearer, unless you want everything to be proven with a demonstration before accepting it.

Like I said, It is probably more than likely true that he could do it. But other than him saying it we have no proof otherwise. So we can't say for certain he could do it. And the Raditz thing is probably a bad comparison considering we have proof that he is brothers with Goku from the Dragon Ball minus stuff. But yeah, if we were talking about before the Dragon Ball minus stuff we could probably say that there is no proof that Goku is his brother.

[Kaboom]

The other thread on this topic was closed for a reason. Reviving an older similar one just to arrogantly make more blanket statements is asking for trouble.