Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site shark.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!tektronix!orca!shark!hutch
From: hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison)
Newsgroups: net.comics
Subject: re: Forge's gun & Marvel Science vs. DC Science
Message-ID: <746@shark.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-May-84 11:10:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: shark.746
Posted: Thu May 10 11:10:03 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 20-May-84 00:10:25 EDT
References: <17@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 53

[ my turn again ]

| > Therefore, the "suppress all super powers" is either VERY temporary
| > or Forge was lying, or Clairmont [sic] is jerking off again.
| > Hutch
| 
| The other possibility is that Forge has no idea of what he's talking
| about.  From what was said in the issue, I inferred that the gun
| had't [sic] been tested *at all*; maybe it won't even work.
| jayembee

Geeesh, how embarrassing, like, waow!  Misspelling Claremont!  Sorry,
I was thinking of Ford Fairmont when I wrote the article!! (E-Man readers
will understand, the rest of you deserve to remain confused.)

I don't think it's too likely that Forge was lying (else why bother with
him at all?  Other writers might do something that silly but ol' Chris
seems to take himself more seriously than that) and I inferred that
he HAD tested the gun.  But possibly only on himself.

Incidentally, about the "non-normal" detector [quote not extracted] I thought
the whole thing was REAL unlikely.  How could such a thing work?  Genetic
scanning from a distance?  Passively?  Nondestructively?  Must be magic!

| > Marvel Comics has NEVER paid even the lip-service to real
| > scientific knowledge that DC pays.  They never let a little thing like
| > credibility (or POSSIBILITY) get in the way of their plot twists.
| > Hutch
| 
| What??  You have to be putting us on!  ALL comic book science is
| bullshit, but it has to be, or we wouldn't have any superheroes to kick
| around.  However, it's always been my impression that Marvel has
| always tried to be more plausible in its science than DC.  Try reading
| THE OFFICIAL HANDBOOK OF THE MARVEL UNIVERSE.  They at least try to
| make the various powers *sound* scientificly credible.  Could you maybe
| give us some examples of DC scientific lip-service?
| jayembee

Hey, I did say LIP SERVICE.  Actually, what I recall are the little timeouts
that DC used to put in their mags "explaining" the scientific reasons for
some of their wierd little plot twists.  This was the stuff they did in the
sixties - do you remember any of that?   Anyway, that was what I meant by
lip-service.  Now, the OffHand, well, they may have tried to make things
sound credible, but since you brought up the "infra-yellow" I get to bring
up the amazing way that (in Marvel-land) 1) gamma rays are not even effective
as an insecticide and 2) radiation can be "drained off" a person leaving them
undamaged (!!) and 3) energy can be created and destroyed [ref. Secret Wars 1]
but lest this degenerate into mud-slinging, I agree the most Comic Science
is screwy.

aside - where's akov68?

Hutch