Grrl Power #224 – Mach-a-bye baby
Harem has virtually no cooldown between ports. She just needs enough time to orient herself, but “virtually” isn’t none, especially to a speedster. She’ll eventually tire from repeated teleports. It’s about as stressful as sprinting, so she can only do it for 25-30 seconds continuously. Still, that’s a lot of teleporting for her. I had meant to show off the martial art she’s been working on that utilizes her teleporting, but she’s been running so much support that this page is the closest she’s come to combat so far. I need to decide if that’s a vital thing to have happen in this battle or if I can lose it for page count considerations. I’d like to show it and it’s only one page, maybe a double, but this is page 24 of the fight, basically an entire comic book worth already. Seeing as how this is their first big fight I don’t see anything wrong with that but I feel like I can be critical about what’s necessary to show off in this battle and what can be saved for the next one.
U. Kaya Yavuz, (AKA Greenstrider in the comments) supplied Silent Shadow as you know, though everyone including him seems to enjoy his ARCverse nickname Mach the Knife. Greenstrider said Mach can do the vibrate till you phase thing, but there’s so much you can do with super speed powers I thought it would be effective if he just sped up enough to get friction involved and burn off the ribbons. Good things they were designed for towing asteroids in the cold of space and not uh… lavaburgs. In a lava flow. Obviously it didn’t do much good for him since Harem was on the case. Really the point of this page was to show Sydney being useful and also to show that Arc-SWAT doesn’t rely on concussions to keep people out till they’re in the paddy wagon. Even minor concussions are dangerous and and it’s difficult to predict how long someone will be out from one, or what state they’ll be in when they come to. I’m tempted to say Harem’s hypospray uses M99, same as Dexter, since it’s extremely powerful and just as importantly, the antidote is nearly instantaneous, but reading up on it, it sounds so dangerous that I imagine Arc-SWAT would have something less risky. Still if they’re being constantly monitored by the wristband, maybe it’s a reasonable use case.
If you voted for Fred Perry’s NSFW game on Offbeatr, then you probably already got an email saying the project has gone live, and then another update 12 hours later saying it’s already been funded. If this if your first time hearing of the project there’s still plenty of time to get in on it, and there’s always the stretch goals. It also tells me you guys are my kind of people and has helped me make up my mind about something that might happen during the fight. :)
<– If you enjoy the comic, you might also enjoy supporting it over at Patreon.
SuperheroThey're super, thanks for asking!
Meatspace ComicSeriously these are awesome. Check 'em out!
Not UpdatingNo longer updating or only updates sporadically, but definitely worth reading.
SeriouslySeriously you guys. If you like Grrl Power the check these out.
"Mature"Mature subject matter and occasionally something explicit but usually safe. Can't guarantee the ads are safe though.
Dongs Ahoy!Full frontal and backal. Lots of skin, sex on some or all pages, explicit or otherwise.
A note to the author:
A possible alternative to tranquilizers/sedatives are psychedelics. Really. A good candidate is DMT or 5-MeO-DMT specifically. They are far less dose sensitive, less lethal and act very fast (less than a minute). They often have unconsciousness as a side-effect. The specific kind of drugs listed above tend to be non-visual and thus the perp doesn’t see hallucination-monsters.
Or you could have Dabbler whip up some Shackles of Durance Vile – No drugs necessary.
https://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateEquipment/wondrousItems/wrists.html#_shackles-of-durance-vile
The the negative effects of 5-MeO-DMT include fear, dysphoria and panic. Those sound like incredibly dangerous emotions to invoke in people who can shoot fire out of body orifices. Every crime they committed, whilst in that state, they could legitimately make a case for not guilty, on the grounds of temporary insanity.
An insanity inflicted by the police. Which would leave them culpable for any deaths and other misdeeds which occurred as a result. I think I like the idea of sedatives more. That way, if there are complications, the only person at additional risk is the villain.
Only downside to traditional sedatives is they can take a while on highly adrenalized people. In some cases, and Supers would be one of them, I’ve seen people fight off the effects which normally doesn’t happen. But Elfguy has it, who knows what Dabbler can whip up.
Adrenal state and catecholamines in general could be a real problem. Having used etorphine on research animals, I can say that stuff is scary as hell. I’m glad it’s not in normal use anymore. There aren’t any known (published anyway) drugs with a wide enough margin of safety that can rapidly render humans unconscious.
I
The subject of how it done actually comes up more often than you think with people who use anesthesia. My personal favorite is several small ketamine darts. You make something like a standard ammo clip but filled with low dose ketamine ballistic syringes. Then you shoot every few seconds till they stay down/get good at guessing body weight. Wouldn’t work against a speedster, for the same reason most projectiles presumably wouldn’t.
My actual biggest problem with this is the amount of time it would take to use an injector as in panel 5, vs the speed he exhibits before. I think this is why speedsters get under played, it’s so hard to maintain that consistency. Also, they would have to be pretty durable considering the forces they would generate.
I think that the injection in panel 5 is less like a typical injection, and more like point blank shot with an anesthetic gun.
Also, this particular speedster doesn’t seem to be that fast, he hasn’t yet broken the sound barrier, so although many guns may not work on him, a good rifle may yet be too fast for him.
I think the injection had time to be used because he had just tired himself out with the vibration trick, presumably he’ll move slower if hes tired which gave Harem time to inject him but not enough to get away unharmed too, although only a minor injury it appears.
Well thought out. I had not considered that.
Another idea would be a pulse that messes with the sleep control part of the brain. You pull the trigger and your target’s brain immediately slips into a healthy unconsciousness. You wouldn’t need to worry about proper dosage, brain damage, or anything that could get you sued by the surviving members of the family.
Yea, sounds good. With the usual caveats about reliability and safety.
Of course. And this series is science fictiony enough to pull it off with a minimum of fuss.
An electromagnetic pulse gun MIGHT do the trick. And the best part is that they are real~! The basic idea is they send a small focus pulse, not very powerful, but if it hits a person in the arm or leg their it messes with the muscles for a second my adding interference. They can go up to about 30 feet, but they aren’t strong enough to mess with the hearts control unless it was a point blank shot to the heart. I’m betting a point blank shot to the back of the head or neck could probably knock someone out temporarily though.
I don’t know if I’d risk it in real life. The brain relies on electrical impulses and screwing with that might kill the connection between brain and body permanently. Just like the police don’t clonk someone on the head when arresting them because a few minutes of unconsciousness can result in brain damage or death due to lack of oxygen and they don’t tranq people in battle because too little does nothing while too much becomes a lethal poison.
In a webcomic however, a focused EMP burst might work.
How about a suspension of finely-ground Sleep materia? The more adrenaline in their system, the faster the spell takes affect!
But, yeah – I suspect that there’s at least one super involved with the tranqs, anywhere from “Invents Drugs that are impossible to Overdose on” to “Precognitive Dosage preparation” (Includes saline-solution syringes for if the villains nick ’em!)
or other types of shackles, like in the Wearing the cape series, the ones the Teatime Anarchist brought from the future which negate powers, this was also used in other books like the Kid Sensation series as well. The idea of tech which can null powers is also used in the Xmen comics and has come up many times in several things including DC comics with the Justice league. just a few things to keep in mind since you do have a few brains and techs in arc who could whip such things up.
DaveB has stated that there is no general power nullifier. This means that any functional power nullifier must be specifically made for its target (or targeted power-set).
Well DaveB space is very cold in the shadows, burning hot out side of them. With no mitigating factors of atmosphere you get it instantly.
Also a paralent could work on a speedster too. It would be torture to be awake and frozen stiff.
It’s hot in the light, but it isn’t instant, things take time to heat up, otherwise water couldn’t extinguish fire.
Additionally, when you move farther from a star, the temperature drops off, that’s why titan (Saturn’s moon) has oceans of liquid methane.
Not io mention Mars is pretty cold even in direct sunlight and it’s right next door (in terms of space).
Last time I checked, asteroids don’t vibrate very much. Its possible that the vibration alone was enough to disintegrate the straps since they were not designed for such forces.
Mars is just outside the Habitable “Goldilocks” Zone. In the past, the sun was a little bigger, and the planets a little closer, so Mars could had liquid water, but it still would have had a thin atmosphere due to its relatively lighter mass (compared to Earth and Venus).
The major reason Mars is so cold is that it lacks a greenhouse gas atmosphere. Without all the water in our atmosphere (water vapor accounts for the vast majority of the greenhouse effect for our planet), we would tend to be much colder and have more radical temperature swings.
Optimistic estimates state that the outer boundary of the “Goldilocks zone” for our solar system lies just beyond Mars, while more conservative estimates say that it lies between Earth and Mars. In theory, if Mars were larger and had retained its thick atmosphere, it could have a habitable surface today. Therefore, the outer boundary of the habitable zone could lie beyond the orbit of Mars.
The reason that Mars lost most of its atmosphere is less to do with size, and more to do with it having a weaker magnetic field (whether this is down to spinning/liquid/iron cores is debatable – they can’t even agree what causes the Earth’s magnetic field)
This means that the atmosphere was “scoured” away by the solar winds – but, they’d have had some bloody impressive aurorae while it happened
Off topic, but this brings up something I have never heard a good explanation for. The standard theory goes that Mars lost its atmosphere when the planetary magnetic field died and allowed the solar wind to strip it away. However, if you look in the other direction you see Venus. It also has no appreciable magnetic field and yet has an atmosphere over 90 times as dense as Earth. This is in spite of being even closer to the sun and blasted with a much higher intensity of solar wind.
I know Venus has a surface gravity of .91 of Earth and Mars has .38. Maybe that is enough to hold a thicker atmosphere, but I am surprised the relative pressure differences between the two.
Very interesting issue. I would be fascinated to hear informed opinion on the matter. Just going on the arguments, as presented in the thread, would seem to offer an answer. There is no magnetic field, but we know there are very high concentrations of greenhouse gasses. So these alone could be providing the protection.
My assumption for planetary formation (again without cheating and looking up stuff), would be that early Mars, Earth and Venus all had magnetic fields. Allowing atmospheres to form, as comets deposited crashed into the planets, bringing their water with them. For whatever reasons, Mars never developed significant greenhouse gasses. So when their magnetic field died, the atmosphere got blasted away. Leaving just the trace greenhouse gasses, that were resistant to being dispersed.
On Earth life developed, creating some greenhouse gasses. But kept it’s magnetic field, so all is good. It makes me wonder what happens every time the magnetic poles swap over. For several years, the Earth is without it’s force field. Cancer rates go through the ceiling.
Plus some (obviously not all) of the atmosphere gets stripped. Any ozone hole in the atmosphere probably enlarges. I bet it probably triggers mutations and super powers too!
Meanwhile on Venus, life develops early. Creating a healthy atmosphere, resistant to the gradually failing magnetic field. Where there is life, sooner or later, intelligent life forms. Which it did far earlier than on Earth. Naturally, they are no better at keeping their industry under control, than we are. So they experienced global warming, which had the typical run-away greenhouse effect.
The plus side though, being that life will still be present on Venus. The extremophiles would have survived. So eventually higher life will again develop. This time adapted to the hothouse environment. In due course, they will eventually learn how to peer beyond their murky atmosphere.
Venetians will wonder at the fact that there is another hothouse planet, but further out, in a much colder orbit than themselves. Perhaps they will figure out that it is the magnetic field aids the hothouse gasses ability to survive solar winds. Never suspecting that a critical part of hothouse atmosphere formation requires industry forming lifeforms.
Maybe they will have religiously minded folks, amongst them, who will proclaim that God has provided them a second, habitable, planet, because they are the chosen race, destined to colonise the planets, and then the stars!
Um…you do know that mars’ atmosphere is 96% Carbon Dioxide, right?
As in, the one gas that lefties are claiming is the single most powerful greenhouse gas out there? (They’re wrong, the strongest greenhouse gas is Dihydrogen Monoxide by quite a large margin ( https://www.dhmo.org/ if you want a good giggle))
It may be 96% carbon dioxide, but 96% of not a lot of atmosphere is still not a lot of atmosphere, soooo it still wouldn’t help heat things up.
As far as I am aware, nobody claims that. It is simply that carbon dioxide is the biggest contributor to global warming. Ie it has a big effect and there is a lot of it. Much of it present due to human activity.
We know that methane is worse, for example. And that is often stated even in the less scientific press, so it is fairly common knowledge. Importantly, carbon dioxide is the one we can actively control, by modifying our factories, power plants and vehicles.
Making cows wear diapers, and/or methane storage tanks, is a bit more problematic.
Um…no…Carbon Dioxide comprises 0.04% of Earth’s atmosphere, and is a WEAK Greenhouse gas, while Dihydrogen Monoxide comprises more than 4% (that’s 100 times more than there is CO2) of the atmosphere and is a much stronger greenhouse gas to boot.
Anyone who tells you that CO2 is the “biggest Contributor” to Global Warming is completely ignorant of the actual composition of the atmosphere.
If we really wanted to reduce human CO2 output, nothing could be simpler…outlaw the Catalytic Converter and we can go back to producing Carbon Monoxide instead, which actually IS a pollutant, while CO2 isn’t.
(For those who haven’t figured it out yet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVxypRWZODQ )
Ignoring you reference to hoaxes I prefer to run with the bulk of learned scientific opinion. We have a consensus of over a thousand of the most qualified specialists on the planet. The dissenting camp have far fewer members and, if you objectively quantify their qualifications, you find that per capita, they are far less qualified.
Arguing the case on isolated scientific points is interesting, but does not change the merits of the overall case, which takes all the elements into consideration.
In the case of your percentage arguments, you are failing to take into account the status quo. The atmospheric composition had a certain ratio of carbon dioxide, which along with the other elements present kept us in a healthy climate balance. We have gradually been changing that mix. Pre-industrialisation it was mainly down to increased methane due to our agriculture. But, since industrialisation, we have dramatically increased the carbon dioxide content.
The amounts involved might seem small to you. Simply because you are looking at them in isolation. Rather than realising that it is the change in ratios that is important. The fact that we are outputting enough to change the figures at a global level indicates the quantities involved are massive. But even on the basis of taking it as being a small percentage of the whole, modelling shows just how badly that is affecting the climate.
Do not let party politics and entrenched, but indefensible, positions to blind you to scientific truths. When species extinction is on the cards, try to avoid those traps.
Don’t forget co2 is just 1 gas that burning fossil fuels put into the atmosphere. There’s sulfur compounds and a host of other crap. And that’s if it burns somewhat efficiently which a good percentage don’t. Sorry but global warming is a real thing caused by man. Any other conclusion is just ridiculous.
While not an expert or overly-educated climatologist, I have to wonder, as a somewhat interested observer, why `the science is settled’ argument conveniently ignores the fact(s) that the models they’re basing their hypothesis on are incorrect approximately 90% of the time. Just as an example, no warming or notable changes in fifteen years or so…essentially, stability. In my unlearned opinion, that would seem to indicate Man has little effect on what Nature does, especially given that in the past fifteen years, a lot of developing countries have been developing using the same `dirty energy’ the climate change alarmists freak about.
Also, it appears to ignore the fact(s) that the Earth has went through numerous extreme climate changes in the past, long before Man set about despoiling the planet. How many Ice Ages were there?
To me, it just seems very…human-centric to believe we’re the cause of it all. In my opinion, we may contribute to the destruction of the planet, but not from anything as long-term as a hypothetical `climate change’. Just as an example, Mauna Lau (I probably mis-spelled that) is stirring again, and putting out more greenhouse gas than Mankind has managed in decades.
Nope, my money is on us getting cranky and setting off a bunch of nukes, probably because “my Invisible Guy In The Sky is better than your Invisible Guy In The Sky”.
For me, there’s way too much politics and money involved in the climate change thing for me to regard it as `settled science’. It’s a hypothesis that has yet to be proven, but anyone with questions is labeled a heretic `denier’. I’m a show-me-the-money kinda guy, and if climate change is real and Man is to blame…where, exactly, is the change? There’s been panic since the 60s on a lower-grade level, but fifty years later and we’re singing the same old song. That, to me, says the science isn’t as settled as some might want to believe.
Just my two cents. Got no dog in the fight; I’m old enough to figure I’ll be long dead before the science is really settled. As a final note, it also seems questionable that the most strident of these scientists make a lot of money off screaming louder; in the form of grants, publication, and book deals. Maybe I’m a cynic.
And no, I’m not an evil `denier’. I’d just like some proof that comes from someone whose livelihood doesn’t depend on me believing what he’s saying. Especially when no one is allowed to hold a dissenting opinion.
Yes, Man is having a negative impact on Mother Earth. I just don’t see climate change as our biggest bit.
No need to go further to give the first response. Indulge me with an analogy. Your neurologist/brain cancer specialist tells you “I believe you have a malign cancerous brain tumour, and unless we operate promptly, you will start to suffer brain damage. Eventually you may die.”
Would you believe him? From your response, presumably not. You would seek a second opinion. Which you do, and you get the same reply. Clearly you would not accept just that. Because the operation has risks involved, that you do not wish to take.
By the time you have finished consulting your 1,000th specialist, ensuring that they are the best, and most qualified on the planet, your prognosis has slipped considerably. At the outset, had you been operated on immediately, you would only have suffered the risks of surgery. By this stage, they are telling you that even if you survive the surgery, you will certainly have brain damage. You have left it too late.
But, they can minimise the effects, if you promptly agree to the corrective surgery. You will have slurred speech, and shaky hands, but you will live. Even a slight delay and you will lose the power to walk and talk. Either way you have quite a high risk that you will die later, due to complications.
That is roughly the state we have progressed to on the planetary diagnosis. So, in the analogy, would you still consider that “I am not a brain surgeon” is a good basis, for ignoring their advice, and acting on your intuition and ill-informed research? Because, with your health and life on the line, I would have thought you would have either trusted the experts, or dedicated your life to becoming more knowledgeable than them.
A friend who had cancer, took the latter course. And found that the expert advice she was getting was sound. Hardly surprising, given that she had already ensured she was consulting the best in the country. Fortunately she had been wise, and followed all their advice, whilst educating herself. As a result of which she is still alive today.
You, however are doing neither. You are ignoring the best advice, given by the majority of the leading experts. And you have failed to educate yourself on the matter. Plus you are insisting that nothing should be done until proof is provided. Despite the fact that the proof has been.
The sad thing is that your vote counts. So you are not just earning a Darwin award for yourself. You are trying to kill me too!
I, like you, am not an expert climatologist. But what I have become is an expert at analysing scientific opinion. Studying where errors get made in the scientific process. And finding ways to overcome the weaknesses and shortcomings, of both science, and the way that society applies it.
The tobacco industry is something that we can learn from here. There are many parallels which can be drawn to the issues that were faced in coming to terms with the science regarding smoking and cancer, versus man made climate change.
* Uncertainty
* Long delay between actions and consequences
* Conflicts of interest
* Unpopular corrective action required
* Selfishness
Some of these points probably require elaboration. So this post will be long. My apologies. Folks who are not interested can skip it easily enough though. But, if I can convince one voter to see reason, then I consider the wall of text to be worthwhile.
Uncertainty Some areas of science have difficulty in proving, definitively, that a proposition is true. Smoking causes cancer is one of them. Mankind causes climate change is another. What you can do though is find ways of testing or showing how likely it is true or not. If it was a simple issue, every such test would always give the same result.
But, if you choose to look at the body of work don,e in proving such complex cases, you can see what the majority of results indicate. If you are not interested in the truth, then you can cherry pick the results which support your contention, and present those as definitive.
The more evidence you have, the easier it is to see the overall picture. Early on in both debates, the body of learned opinion supported the contentions made. And the bulk of evidence continued to support the case. But, due to the complexities involved, there will always be minority evidence which contradicts the majority. Hence a degree of uncertainty will always remain.
In both cases though the majority of scientific specialists have a consensus that they are true.
Long delay between actions and consequences This is problematic in two ways. One is that it delays the whole scientific process. The way we solved it, for the tobacco industry, was to let millions of people smoke and study their lives, and see how much earlier they died than people who did not. Which confirmed all of the other clever techniques and methods that scientists had come up with years before.
Social inertia meant that we ignored the consensus of advice given by science, until the results of millions of unnecessary, painful, lingering deaths proved the case. Again. We
could takeare taking that action with the planet. But, because of the delay, it will be our children and grand children who will face the consequences. Not us.Which is the root of the second problem. Scientific study has shown that people are very bad at dealing with delayed risk/reward. If you tell them, ‘do this and you will get an immediate reward/punishment’ they will respond in the logical fashion. Put a delay in the reward/punishment and their behaviour becomes illogical. The longer the delay, the less they care about the long term consequences and the more they focus on the minor results of their actions in the short term.
You are not concerned about climate change, because the consequences will not be faced by you.
Conflicts of interest For the tobacco issue, the conflicts were numerous. Tobacco companies made fortunes. Governments earnt taxes. Shops made profits. Employees earnt salaries. Tobacco addicts satisfied their cravings. People got to look cool and enjoy their lifestyle choice. For climate change, the conflicts are similar. Energy companies being the obvious change.
But the conflicted individuals are everybody in society, not just the smokers. We all enjoy fast cars, aeroplanes, having goods shipped from the furthest corner of the globe, into our supermarket, big houses that are toasty warm in winter and nice and cool in summer, lots and lots of electrical goods, computers and so on. All of which would be compromised by making the tough choices.
Nobody likes the tough choices, and giving up things that they like. Such as profits, looking cool and having better ways of attracting mates. So will look for ways to avoid the issue. Cherry pick the results which support not taking action, to salve their conscience. Decide that the people who argue for austerity are their political enemies and disparage their arguments and decisions.
This has a huge cumulative effect. The most noticeable being the massive money that big industry can throw into lobbying. That gives the politicians, and any other individuals with noticeable vested interests, a disproportionate war-chest to fight their public relations campaign. And that campaign has plenty of supporters in society, who are suffering conflicted interests themselves.
We know that people are bad at making long-term decisions, if it means that short-term they are suffering.
Unpopular corrective action required Pretty much incorporated that in the previous.
Selfishness For the tobacco industry it was ‘the present me is having fun, sod the old me’. Likewise ‘I am not concerned that my unborn children may have stunted growth, brain damage and other health problems’. And the fact that other people will be suffering from secondary smoking was simply a laughing matter.
For climate change, there is not enough room in this post to detail them, or the consequences.
How do you sort through the bullshit, and find the truth, when there are individuals out there cherry picking minority data to argue their case? Why do I phrase it like that? Because I have lived through the tobacco parallel and see exactly the same things happening again. So, yes, I have a bias. But it means that I must find a way to overcome my bias.
If I fail to do that, then I risk making a bad decision, for emotive reasons.
The solution A field of science has come up with an answer, for complex decisions like this. Sometimes you just need an immediate answer to a crisis. Say a volcano is rumbling and smoking. It may or may not erupt. Worse, some volcanologists are advising evacuation, whilst others are saying it is not necessary. What choice should the politician make?
The same technique can be used for both the above example and complex issues like climate change. You add up all of the scientists who advise one course of action versus those who say the contradicting route. Clearly though that is not adequate. One camp may be full of learned professors, and the other drop-out pot smokers.
The rule of thumb that scientists use, to judge each other’s competence, can be used here though. If they have no other information to go on (such as personal recommendations) then they can simply add up the number of papers that individual has written. If needing to know their expertise on a particular subject, then only papers relating to that should be considered.
It is not foolproof, but it is a fairly good method. And, what flaws there are, vanish if you are dealing with large numbers of individuals. In the case of climate change there are a huge number, so it becomes a good technique.
This exercise has been done. The pro-climate change camp vastly outnumbers the anti camp. Plus they are several fold more qualified. Until, or unless, enough evidence comes in to convince the experts to move from the pro-camp to the anti camp, I am staying with the majority.
The small minority, of less competent scientists, have the deep pockets of the energy industry to ensure their voices and opinions are heard loudly. But I trust science more than smoke and mirrors PR campaigns.
To Grimjac:
What are these models you refer to that are 90% wrong and are still used? Please leave a link.
“No warming or notable changes”- have you ever seen a heat map?
“as an example, Mauna Lau (I probably mis-spelled that) is stirring again, and putting out more greenhouse gas than Mankind has managed in decades”- Physics time:
Human CO2 is about 35,000,000,000 metric tons per year
The largest eruption in over 2 millennium (Mount Tambora had 16 times the energy of the largest nuke ever exploded) only put out 140000000000 tonnes of material TOTAL
That’s 4 times that much TOTAL mass (including thrown boulders, which do not affect the climate) than what humans put out in a year.
ALSO
What the heck have they been throwing into the volcano that makes it spew greenhouse gasses, volcanoes normally shoot mostly sulfur, which is an atmospheric coolant (Global temperature dropped a few degrees for a few years after tambora erupted).
FINALLY
As Yorp kindly pointed out, this is a long term problem, actually to the point that most people alive today will never HAVE to deal with it.
But someone has to eventually, and it’s probably best to not say “We’ll get to it eventually” (Like lots of people like to do)
My two cents:
Nuclear power is amazing
Reactors can NOT undergo a nuclear explosion (chernobyl lit on fire and melted, then boiled, just like anything that gets too hot [like things on or near fire tend to do])
The “harmful byproducts” are steam and depleted uranium (Which are as dangerous to you or me as tap water and extra strong lead (note: do not lick spent fuel rods) respectively.
A worker in a nuclear power plant receives a lower amount of radiation than a worker in a coal plant.
Yes, haha, there’s water in the air.
Someone once told me that the water in the oceans trap even more heat than the water in the air.
But removing this is the goal of an idiot.
Removing some of the CO2 we have added is not.
Logical falacies and why the “Anthroprogenic Global Warming due to CO2” ‘proofs’ don’t work.
Here is a classic logical and mathematical falacy: A false “Proof” that 2 = 1.
1. Let a and b be equal and non-zero: a = b != 0
2. Multiply a = b through by a: a*a = a*b
3. Subtract b squared: a*a – b*b = a*b – b*b
4. Factor both sides: (a – b)*(a + b) = b*(a – b)
5. Divide out (a – b): a + b = b
6. Observing that a = b: b + b = b
7. Combine like terms on the left: 2b = b
8. Divide by the non-zero b: 2 = 1
This proof falls apart at step 5, because if A = B, then A – B = 0, and dividing by zero is undefined. This demonstrates why logical arguments can only proceed from provable, accurate valid steps. As soon as you allow an inaccurate or invalid step in any logical or mathematical proof, any conclusions after that step have not been proved and are therefore invalid.
Here is the SHORT list of faulty premises, at least one of which found in every AGW argument made so far.
It is warmer now than it has ever been in recorded history: Only if you ignore what is known as the Mideval Warm Period, when it was warm enough to grow grape vines in England and Greenland was Green. It was even warmer during the Holocene Maximum, 8,000 years ago. We are effectively near the end of an ice age.
Greenhouse Gasses are primarily responsible for warming: This is incorrect. Solar activity is the primary cause of warming and cooling by far. The climate temperature records fit the records of solar activity with far more correlation than they do to measurements of CO2 or any other “Greenhouse Gas.”
CO2 Is a pollutant: CO2 is a natural gas produced by innumerable sources, only a few of which are human-caused, and even THOSE sources could be reduced significantly by outlawing the Catalytic Converter and going back to producing smog-inducing CO instead of Biosphere-friendly CO2. CO2 is part of what is known as the “Carbon Cycle” and is a critically important part of the ecosystem. In no way can it be described as a “Pollutant”
CO2 comprises a large portion of the atmosphere: CO2 comprises less than 0.04% of the atmosphere, and is self-regulating, since more CO2 promotes more plant and algae growth, which lowers CO2. The actual atmospheric percentages are approximately: Nitrogen: 78% Oxygen: 21% Argon: 1% (Yes, that adds to 100 due to rounding. Everything else in the atmosphere is 0.627%, of which 0.25% is Dihydrogen Monoxide, 0.035% is CO2, 0.001818% is Neon, most of the rest being Hydrogen, Krypton, Methane, and Helium.
CO2 Is the strongest Greenhouse Gas: Dihydrogen Monoxide is BY FAR a stronger greenhouse gas, and in addition comprises at least seven times as much of the atmosphere as CO2. (0.25% overall, but varying from 10 PPMV in desert areas to up to 5% by volume in tropical areas.) – So everyone support https://www.dhmo.org if you are really worried about greenhouse gasses.
Temperature rises always follow a rise in CO2: Actually, the reverse is true. If you look at the data more closely, the temperature rises FIRST, and CO2 rises up to 800 years later. The only reason Al Gore was able to get away with “Don’t they look like they go together?” is because he used a scale of tens of thousands of years, which makes it impossible to see the 800 year delay. Even if this really WAS a true statement, Correlation does not imply causation. For example, if 95% of automobile accidents occur on paved roads, that does not imply that paved roads cause automobile accidents and therefore all roads should be de-paved? No. As anyone who thinks about it knows, it is because 95% of roads are paved.
A rise in global temperature causes violent weather: Storms are caused by a difference in temperature between the equator and the polar regions. If the temperature of the Earth rises, the greatest increase would be at the poles, as ice melts and the surface Albedo drops, as opposed to the equator, where more evaporation will increase the humidity. More humidity will increase the likelyhood of cloud formation in the equator and tropic latitudes, increasing the albedo in those areas and limiting the temperature increase. This decreases the temperature difference between the poles and the equator, and thus would REDUCE storminess rather than increasing it.
Consensus is scientific Truth (AKA “The Science is settled”, AKA “Argumentum Ad Populum”): Do we really need to mention Aristotle and Galileo? No, Consensus isn’t science, it is the perogative of Politicians and Pontiffs. If Consensus was scientifically significant, the Earth would be at the center of the universe with everything else going around it. It isn’t, and we know that because Galileo fought the consensus of his time because observation of the facts contradicted it.
2500 top scientists all agree: Wrong. Anyone associated with the IPCC, whether they were scientists or not, and whether they agreed with the conclusions or not, were added to the list to inflate this number. The lead author of the report acually had to sue to get his name OFF the list.
Computer models are highly accurate, and can be used to predict future climate centuries into the future: This is simply not true. Any computer model, even the most precise, cannot predict any chaotic system like climate or the weather, even a few DAYS into the future, never mind centuries. And even if you could somehow manage to create a computer model accurate enough to make Hari Seldon-esquely accurate predictions into the future, the slightest error in your data will throw the results so far off as to render the entire exercise useless. This is known as “GIGO” in the computer industry. “Garbage In, Garbage Out” – To quote the inventor of the first computer:
“On two occasions I have been asked, “Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?” … I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.” – Charles Babbage
You can always tell when disbelievers are failing in their arguments. They have to keep falling back on attacking politics, politicians and citing incidents, which are irrelevant to the science. I stated that the independent analysis of the numbers and qualifications of the scientists showed that the pro camp vastly outnumber the anti. And they are significantly more qualified.
Your only answer to that was smoke and mirrors. It discredits the rest of your reply.
Galileo was around in an era when religion dominated learned thought, over science. So it is a fallacy to draw that as a comparison. The bulk of learned men were looking to religion as being central to truth and learning. Whereas here we are talking about scientists, on both sides of the argument.
That said, the underlying truth is that scientists can be wrong, so your point is reasonable. But, currently the significant majority of specialists on the subject have not been swayed by the minority view. Science operates by the minority convincing the majority of the merits of their arguments. Which they have failed to do.
So, having failed to convince their peers, we are somehow meant to believe that God is on the side of the underdogs? Otherwise I fail to see the merit of your case.
Plus, look at the fail safe issue. If we follow the path advised by the more qualified majority, we will take steps to reduce pollutants (not just CO2, even if that is the headline-grabbing focus). We will also curb the amount of conspicuous consumption by the over-developed countries.
Neither of those things are actually bad. The only trouble being that it will impact your quality of life. But the courses of action taken will in no way harm the planet. Rather, even if their conclusions are wrong, it will still benefit the environment, and society.
Conversely, if we follow the minority path, of the less-qualified scientists, we do not take those actions, and can end up with a disastrous consequence. There will certainly be more extinctions. Of which humanity is one of the candidates on the list. But, even removing that, because deniers tend to bleat about ’emotive arguments’, we will still face dreadful conditions for humanity.
So, even if the minority are correct, and what is happening is due to natural variability alone (which is bollox, but I am humouring you here), would you not rather that we made our best efforts to mitigate the disasters that human society will face? Or are you happy to have your children and grandchildren fighting to the death over scarce resources?
I did not notice your logical equation dealing with that issue at all. Yet it is rather the most important aspect. The most learned scientists on the planet are just as capable of logical deduction as you. And are specialists at studying the complex systems we are talking about. However you ignore their logic, and substitute your own. And conveniently forget the single most important element.
Here is a little fact for all of you to consider.
We are still technicly in an ice age(look up the scientific definition).
Now with that been said I have yet to here any one else suggest we just might be hitting the end of said ice age.
Now why do you think that might be, HMM.?
The problem with the whole natural variability argument is the amplification of any natural effects and the speed with which we are changing it.
Lifeforms within an eco system have a vested interest in stabilising the environment, within a zone that is habitable by them. They do not need to realise they are doing it for this to happen. If they get it wrong, through their own actions, the environment changes faster than they can adapt, and they die out. Gradually things will revert to the old status quo, driven by the surviving lifeforms which are adapted to altering the environment to suit their needs.
By example rainforests are called that because they are in rainy areas. But, often, when they are cut down, the local climate often changes to a dry and barren environment. It is the very presence of the rainforest, and the rain encouraging organisms within it, which contribute to the purely mechanical systems of precipitation and evaporation, is what make the region rainy. The roots trap moisture. The trees provide shade, which prevents evaporation. The bacteria and fungi, and even trees, emit tiny particles which seed the clouds, which may otherwise pass, encouraging rainfall. And so on.
Evolution does not just act on individual species. Collectively, it acts on the whole ecosystem too. We used to have a very diverse biota that was specialised at surviving at the temperate climates (here I am talking the kind of planetary temperature range we are used to, as opposed to a snowball or hothouse Earth).
We only have the ratio of oxygen to other gaseous elements that we do, due to the presence of life. And every species is contributing to it, one way or another. Some of them critically so. Many of which we probably do not even fully appreciate. They will be acting as heat sinks, or brakes on the system, stopping change from happening too fast, in either direction.
But, because we are killing off vast numbers of species, all of those natural climate control systems are dying out. Because we do not understand them all fully, their presence was complicating forecasting. The more of them that die out, the easier the forecasting becomes. But the less likely we are to be able to survive the effects.
Bear in mind that if you examine the geological record, there are periods where such mass-extinctions as we are in the process of causing have occurred in the past. Such as when the dinosaurs died out. Again, we are doing this so fast that we face geologists classing the era we live in a a new geological age. We are altering the fossil record to that extent. In our lifetimes. Not over millions of years.
On top of that we are directly changing the climate ourselves. The combination of polluting and chopping down our life support systems, and pumping greenhouse gasses into the air, is a deadly one.
Normally it takes thousands of years to drift from an ice age to a temperate climate, or vice versa. The species in the ecosystem can gradually adapt to the changing environment. Because we are making that degree of change in a single generation, there are many species which are dying out not from pollution or direct attack by us, but by the rapid change alone.
Which is very bad, because we will be loosing many species who’s vested interests were in keeping change to a slow pace. Because we are only at an infancy in understanding such systems, and they are dying out faster than we can learn what they actually used to do, it makes our modelling that much harder.
This is why am I most worried about the difficulties in modelling. The fact that there were many checks and balances which used to help the planet stay habitable (for us). It means that purely mechanical modelling will tend to suggest that things will even out. Except we have killed the things off which used to do that in the past. And are killing even more day by day.
Compound this by the fact that the pro-climate change camp have to always use the most conservative figures (which cannot take into account all the effects I am describing), and it means I believe we will be in for a lot worse scenario. The conservative options are not, in my (non-expert) opinion, the most likely ones. I predict that we will be facing far worse. Which makes the runaway greenhouse scenario much more likely.
And, worst of all, even if we put the bakes on now, all we are planning on doing is slightly reducing our contributing effects. We have no plans to mitigate the loss of biota.
But, the good news is that the climate scientists are still being optimistic (if we act now, which is unlikely), so there is no need to despair. Sleep easy under the assumption that I am being paranoid on this, as that extreme a view is in a distinct minority.
But, just in case I am right, ensure that we put full support on any project to establish off-planet self-sufficient colonies. Because, incredibly hard though that will be, it is a lot easier than stopping seven billion people, intent on earning a collective Darwin award.
/end climate change ranting. Normal programming will now resume.
You forgot to mention that not only are we at the tail end of an ice age, but the whole “Consensus” argument is bunkum anyway. It’s known rhetorically as “Argumentum Ad Populum” and has no scientific merit whatsoever…after all the “consensus” of “Scientists” before Galileo were absolutely convinced that Earth was the center of the universe, and that “consensus” didn’t make it true.
In any case, the so-called Consensus of “Scientists” is actually the consensus of 2000 political hacks at the UN…the actual scientists who wrote the first IPCC report actually said in the full report “We don’t know if human activity has any effect on the climate, and we can’t detect any significant human contributions to it.” and then a bunch of politicians wrote a “Summary” that said the exact opposite…and the LEAD AUTHOR of the scientific portion actually sued to get his name off the list of contributors.
So yeah, real “Science” there.
For further study, check out some of Christopher Monickton’s lectures and interviews:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zOXmJ4jd-8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEPFmwvqdDo&list=PL617F3E63A6CD8ED7
To Elfguy: (because there is no reply button by his comment)
So you are saying that having a consensus doesn’t make something true.
You then immediately said that the scientists aren’t in consensus anyway.
Your logic needs some work, friend.
The example you chose to back your point was a scientist who came along and thoroughly disproved the blind-faith, data-less, unfounded argument that the earth was the center of the universe.
He based his ideas on a model that explained all of the data he had available, using the best math available (at the time).
The facts that your weather forecast was wrong, and you saw snow, and maybe your town had a record cold winter, does not disprove climate change.
I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but the TV show, Cosmos, recently went over this issue a bit, using what I thought was a great analogy:
A man walks in a line across the beach, with him is a dog on a leash. The dog’s path, like the weather, varies almost completely at random. But the man’s path, the climate, is following a fixed trend.
We can’t measure the climate though, only the weather, even so, we can figure out the climate, by seeing that the climate “pulls” the weather along a path.
We have the world’s most powerful supercomputers working on this.
If you want to argue with the results given out by a computer so ridiculously powerful, you might as well leave the internet (after all, it is hosted by computers, which are apparently known for being incorrect and inaccurate).
Ok I started to watch the clip, but it is an hour and a half long, so I just listened to the beginning, to see if it may be worth it. His resume was hyped up as being very impressive, but listening to it just left me suspicious, due to lacking key attributes that would impress me for an ‘expert’ on the subject, in question. I was moderately impressed that he was an advisor to Margaret Thatcher though, so bore with it. Although she did both good and bad, some of the good stuff she did needed to be done, despite being painful.
But found his whole tone to be even more suspicious than his resume. So did a brief bit of research. Immediately discovering that his degree and pre-politics career was not in any field of science, let alone climate science. He was in fact a journalist.
Then I found out that the primary policy he advised Thatcher on was the one that I consider to have been the most disastrous and damaging to the country, long term. Plus that he is now a prominent member of UKIP.
Not that I would hold his politics against him. But I prefer to get my science facts from scientists, rather than politicians. I do have every respect for science journalists, but only those who know what they are talking about. The ones who have actually studied science. So by this stage I had pretty much ruled out wasting my time.
But, for the sake of completeness, tried to see if I could find a more concise summary of his position, than a feature-film length lecture. Rather than finding anything useful, like that, what kept jumping out was a series of articles which drew even more suspicion over his integrity.
Including having been brought to task by the House of Lords, for making false claims.
His arguments may or may not have merit. But I restrict my sources to those that I consider credible. I find this guy to be no more so than Al Gore.
What I do find ironic is the fact that he was listed as one of the ‘scientists’ compiled to pad out the anti-climate change camp’s numbers.
Just as well that only genuine peer-reviewed papers get counted when making unbiased, independent assessments as to the qualifications of … eer I was going to say scientists, but he isn’t even that. So, nope, did not bother watching, sorry.
To Elfguy, to pile on to what others have said, 1) Monckton is not a scientist, so why his opinion matters in these debates has always been a mystery to me. It’s like asking for dental advice from a plumber. 2) He willfully and knowingly uses cherry picked data to support his point, but in every case I’m aware of, if you look at the full spectrum of data he’s referencing instead of just the cropped part that he shows, it demonstrates clearly that he’s just lying so that people will pay him to speak at… I don’t know… oil company conferences? Republican conventions?
If you ignore the goofy intercuts at the beginning of this video, the series shows that he’s just flat out lying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfA1LpiYk2o I know the video has some dumb stuff at the beginning, but if you watch it all, I’d be interested in knowing what your response is to the parts where the guy who made the video shows that Monckton is undeniably using selective data. It’s like being shown this XKCD and not getting the joke. The video also takes the time to show where many of the quotes Monckton likes to use are from, but unlike Monckton, who again is cherry picking the stuff that makes it sound like he’s right, the video shows the actual papers he’s pulling quotes from and shows the context of the quote, and again shows that Monckton’s pants are totally on fire.
Let me put it this way. If you saw a movie poster, and on it was a quote from your favorite movie critic saying “…the greatest movie of the decade…” and then you went and saw the movie and it was terrible, and then you found out that your favorite critic said “To suggest this film is the greatest movie of this decade would actually be the greatest crime ever visited upon humanity.” Wouldn’t you be a bit peeved at the cherry picking? That’s exactly what Monckton does, and that video shows him doing it.
Another thing, while Argumentum ad Populum is a logical fallacy, it generally refers to an uneducated public’s belief in something. Sure, there were times where “scientists” believed the sun went around the Earth, but in those days much of science was essentially garbage like astrology, consulting the bible or just guessing based on scant observation that ignored problems like “why do some of the planets seem to backtrack while they orbit the Earth” But current climate science is backed up by a staggering amount of evidence, and it’s something science deniers don’t have an answer for. They can’t dismiss each and every piece of evidence, where as all the evidence we do have points to the same thing. And it’s not 2000 hacks at the UN that are saying that anthropogenic climate change is real, it’s over 97% of all climate scientists, and all other scientific disciplines that have anything to do with studying space, the sun, the atmosphere, examining carbon and oxygen content from years past, etc. It’s tens of thousands of scientists all in agreement. This clip from John Oliver’s show hints at the numbers involved. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg
Also while Argumentum ad Populum is a logical fallacy, it doesn’t automatically mean that anything that has consensus is automatically untrue. It is a popularly held belief that if you jump off an 80 story building, you’re likely to be grievously injured. The difference is that it’s not really a belief. It’s accepted as true based on a preponderance of evidence.
Geeze, I should be drawing instead of typing all this out. Watch the Monckton debunking. Like I said, it catches him red handed in his lies.
“It’s hot in the light, but it isn’t instant, things take time to heat up, otherwise water couldn’t extinguish fire.
Additionally, when you move farther from a star, the temperature drops off, that’s why titan (Saturn’s moon) has oceans of liquid methane.”
It does in outer space. You do recall that was my point? No mitigation of it. No protection from its full impact. Doesn’t Titan have an atmosphere? Mitigation by atmosphere. Without GHG’s in our atmosphere the Earth would be quite a bit cooler.
If you don’t show off Harem’s “Lightstorm,” you at least need to bring it up again – essentially, recognize it as a thing folks are waiting for, even if the response is to razz them.
So either show it, or show Halo complaining that she didn’t get to see it and someone promising that there’ll be other chances.
Don’t touch the guy with the your weapon. The he knows exactly where it is and by extension you.
If you’re referring to the gun that Harem was holding to his neck, that would be the tranq gun that she injected him with, thus the pfft sound effect of it going off. You kind of have to touch someone with that for it to work.
Also hardly a problem if you can teleport away as soon as the gun did it’s job.
Mach was ALMOST fast enough
the tranq gun itself is probably a modified version of the old mass inoculation guns they used to use before they realized that they could spread blood-borne pathogens.
basically it had a vibrating blade in the tip that slit open the skin then a vaporized inoculation would go through the cut. If you tensed up it really tore up your arm.
I’m thinking the ones they use now which shoots the vaccine under such pressure that it penetrates the skin. (Basically a lot like the Hypo-sprays in Star-Trek probably work)
As far back as the 1960’s they had a clear liquid compound called dimethyl sulfoxide
(=”DMSO”, discovered in 1866, first reported in 1867) that could serve as a “vehicle” to a huge spectrum of different compounds. If sprayed on the skin, it would be absorbed into the bloodstream, bringing its dissolved “passenger”-compound with it. No need for special high-pressure injections, a simple squeeze-type spray bottle would do just fine.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_sulfoxide]
Any agent introduced via DMSO takes a little time to start working–a few seconds at least (much slower than Harem’s pressure injector), enough time for Mach to sling daggers in every direction as he goes down–and it also has the unhappy side effect of bringing along any soluble substance that’s already on the skin, so you don’t want to use it in conditions of questionable sanitation. ARCSwat are Supers, but they’re also cops, which means they (hopefully) have a strict ethical code, or at least something like the ‘continuum of force’ philosophy. Inadvertantly poisoning or sickening suspects under custody is a law enforcement no-no, as is forcibly subjecting them to psychedelics or pharmaceutical immobilizers. In real-world LE doctrine, chemical restraint of any kind is very questionable, but obviously you need to step it up a bit if you plan to arrest somebody who can literally eat handcuffs for breakfast. I think DaveB has put some good thought into how to restrain supers and where the ethical boundaries are drawn.
DMSO would be regarded as not a good one to use. It’s freezing point it too high.
From the wikipedia article ‘The relatively high freezing point of DMSO, 18.5 °C (65.3 °F), means that at, or just below, room temperature it is a solid, which can limit its utility in some chemical processes’
yeah it’s what they use on any form of transdermal patches like Nitroglycerin patches for heart problems.
She’s fighting a speedster. At any other range, it’s possible that he could dodge the projectile.
Ah, Sydney is busy with 2 balls or else we might have known if the unknowns included a “heal” effect…
If she healed herself, it would also “cure” her of the ability to eat spicy food.
As said tolerance is really caused by a die-off of nerves in the mouth.
Yup.
It is worth noting that Halo could always put down the person she is carrying and then switch to using a healing orb. Barring the fact that she has neither claimed to have that power (in fact having listed all of their powers and not included healing in them). Plus she has not used them to cure her own injury, such as with the noodle incident.
Further conducting medical experiments, on unconscious patients (especially with TV cameras recording the process) would be a good way of finding herself in court. She lacks a licence to practice medicine, and has failed to obtain informed concent to such a dangerous procedure.
Realistically, there’s no such thing as an incapacitating agent that’s both reliable and safe, and the options that come closest are slow. However, given that ArcSWAT would be fully justified in using lethal force, using an option that is merely somewhat unsafe is being pretty generous anyway.
Besides, DaveB is allowed a modified formulation considering all the genius and mega-tech Archon has on call.
I’m kind of disappointed. One of the things DaveB said was that he wasn’t going to include Power Nullifiers because those were a bit too convenient and unrealistic.
Archon’s little armbands might as well be Power Nullifiers. They are just as unrealistic. Using drugs to keep people unconscious is kind of chancy in the real world on normal people. On supers who may have very non-normal biochemistry it should be all but impossible. The same drug at the same dosage could have no effect on one guy and kill the next.
Some of these guys may not be Human at all. The presence of Dabbler in the setting establishes that there are extra-terrestrial aliens as well as supernatural creatures like Demons and Dopplegangers in the ARCverse.
What is shown here is not outside the realm of modern medicine. We have way of doing what the wristbands do, its just that in our world they don’t fit into wrist bands, because diagnostic equipment alone can take up most of a room.
As for biochemistry, I imagine ARCswat has done enough of their homework to find and create a safe sedative. Also if a person were so biologically different that common sedatives would have distinctly different than the intended effects, these people probably no longer qualify as homo sapiens.
Actually, it -is- pretty far outside of real world science.
I don’t have too much trouble with the idea of a wrist mounted heart beat and blood-oxygen monitor. I think that could be done. It should be noted that the information provided would not be nearly enough to tell you if you were about to kill your patient with a sedative overdose.
I do have a problem with a general-purpose sedative that will work across a broad spectrum of human beings without need for careful monitoring. That simply doesn’t exist. We aren’t anywhere close to making something like that exist. Maybe Dabbler has some.
I admit I am only guessing that there is any interaction between powers and the biology of the people who have them. I don’t believe anything has been specifically said about that. They mention that Mach probably has a “redonk” metabolism. If so, how could they possibly know what a sedative will do to him?
In some ways it might be easier to sedate superhumans (as set in this universe), at least superhumans with innate powers that are not linked to their metabolism, because the (established) consistent body type implies similar metabolisms in other ways, and probably indicates that supers are generically healthier and therefore less likely to suffer ill effects from anesthetics. However, that goes out the window when dealing with the people whose powers modify their metabolisms — such as mister speedster there.
Portable Handheld ECG EKG Heart Rate Heartbeat Monitor
Hand Held Respiration Monitor
You make a good point, the wrist monitor wouldn’t have to track everything, like a full hospital setup might, it only really needs the information relevant to sedation.
Seeing what areas if tech we develop always seems funny.
Remember the space race? We got from first ever powered flight, to man on the moon, in six decades.
Now we have machines that can do hours of math calculations in mere seconds, that fit in our pockets. (as well as functioning adequately as a miniature “most things you want”).
What will be the next area of leap?
You’re right, the smart phones available today are the proverbial tricorders and communicators in one little pocket size device.
He never said there weren’t Power Nullifiers, he said there weren’t any AllPurpose Nullies: in other words, each one will have to be specifically tailored to each Super (note, Super individual not Super power/ability)
And then he gives us an All Purpose Sedative that doesn’t have to be tailored.
From the sounds of it, the monitor watch tailors it to each body it is attached to
Not that unbelievable. They don’t tailor the anesthetic for you at the hospital when you get surgery. They just check your allergies, body type, gender, and medical history to pick from a collection of sleepy time drugs. The only tailoring is dosage.
I agree. But that does not make me disappointed. It simply makes me infer that the doses are being professionally judged. Either Harem has been well trained in their use. Or she is getting live prompting from Super Doc, back at Archon, via her pip-boy.
These villains are already unconscious. So there is no danger in giving each a normal dosage, based on their BMI. It is not like it will wake them up. Plus they are hooked up to monitoring devices. The trained professional receiving the feed (either Harem on site, or someone at the remote monitoring station), can assess if the changes in respiration and heartbeat are as expected, for a sedated individual.
If not, they can either take steps to deal with an overdose, or allergic reaction, if that is diagnosed. Or they can increase the dosage, if it is clear that the individual has high resistance to it.
Basically these are precisely the kinds of things that anaesthetists do genuinely conduct. Except these patients may have greater variance in their metabolisms than normal. Note that we (as readers) do not know if super powers change metabolisms.
They may, alternatively, directly alter the world, without tinkering with the biochemistry of their hosts (other than making them optimally healthy/attractive). Super speed could be due to operating in an accelerated time bubble, not due to the body clock running faster.
The super speeder is the least problem by the way. If the machine is set to deliver it’s dose whenever the heartbeat rises above X and/or respiration reaches Y. It just means that it will be squirting the drug in more frequently for him. And that Harem will need to top up it’s reservoir much more often. And monitor him more closely than others.
The issue wasn’t that there were no ways to hold/nullify supers. Its that there were few if any ways to do so that left them with any ability to act. Yes sedation for the period of the term will make the job easy, but they still need to be up to be fed, and have some excercise time, to prevent the whole ‘cruel and/or unusual punishment’ thing. Which means it is not a GOOD answer by any means.
Yea, quite clearly this is only meant to be a temporary measure. Keeping a person indefinitely sedated would be out of the question. Not that I think, for one second, that DaveB would be implying that it was anything other than a way of keeping them briefly unconscious, until they were taken to secure holding facilities. The ArcHive Cells.
If somebody was so dangerous that such a course had to be genuinely considered, it should be viewed on a par with ordering them executed. There being little to distinguish keeping a person asleep, until they die, from complications or old age, from simply killing them.
I never saw the wrist monitors as anything but a short-term measure, keep that bad guy down until somebody can spare a minute to toss him in the Black
Mariah. Also, one of the Harems (the one I’ve started thinking of as ‘Compassionate Harem’) is right there to keep an eye on things. If anyone goes into super-cardiac arrest she can vorp in a super-medic, and if anyone wakes up she can give them a little nite-nite tap.
That would be Blondini
crazy high metabolism means that he would metabolize the tranq crazy fast but also that they would bur through calories quickly which mean’s he will get hungry very fast
Depending on how “crazy high” it should also mean that he ages really fast. You have to wonder just how old Mach is, and how long he will live.
Damn, that is a good one. +1
+1
depending on when his powers became active (but i can see why someone with such a crazed metabolism would turn to villany the food bill alone would be killer and the knowledge you will have the lifespan of a rodent if not shorter)
How is the Zipping Foot-slicing Wanker running without having to deal with friction burns?
Was my question too. The only other “super speed” character I know was using lightest robes, lightest swords and absolutely no load whatsoever. Else he was getting overburdened, tired out and extremely sad.
This one’s carrying hell of a lot of clothes, knives, and what not.
‘Realistic’ super-speed pretty much requires superhuman durability, and friction is hardly the worst of it — running is tough enough on your legs even at normal human speeds, and the forces involved go up with the square of speed.
It also requires clinging, otherwise air resistance will exceed ground friction at 100-150 mph.
Reminds me of the speedster episode of X-Files. The kid had muscle fatigue like he’d been playing pro football for 30 years, but he was 14.
“Realistic” and “super-power” don’t ever describe the same thing. You can come up with all sorts of required secondary powers, or adhoc explanations, to try making it make sense, but at the end telling the story is always going to come down to either hiding behind obfuscating technobabble or just blatantly accepting that: “Meh, it’s super powers; just go with it, okay”.
I like to see both options taken:
“but how does that that power work?”
“by utilizing neurochemical processes in the brain
to modify the quantum loop field of nearby matter,
allowing the p-strings to constructively interfere,
exciting the mu-gluons in the…”
“bwha?”
“he makes things go boom with his mind”
“ok…”
I am fine with the former approach. It is why the super hero genre exists as a separate body of work to science fiction. But, if a realistic explanation can be pulled off:
+1
Say, do Harem’s power preserve momentum? Can she let herself fall, then teleport herself above her opponent? And what happens if she teleports into the opponent? Does she replace part of the opponent’s body?
DaveB has answered one part of that. Harem cannot teleport into things, even by mistake. There is a kind of “safety” function to her power. It can be inferred from this that teleporting into things would be Bad.
It is probably that she does not conserve momentum. If she did, then teleports that caused her to change latitude or elevation would give her a lot of problems. That doesn’t mean there are no limits to how much she can compensate for, and it doesn’t mean she can’t choose to forgo the compensation. She might develop some interesting tricks that way. There is no way to predict how a super power will end up working.
No reasonable change of elevation would be enough to cause a problem with conserving momentum, but I can imagine that a sufficiently large change in latitude could be very bad.
The earth rotates in 24 hours and has circumference of about 40,000km.
The equator is therefore moving at about 460m/s.
Teleporting from the equator to the north or south pole would put Harem through the sound barrier.
Ouch.
This page seems to suggest that she has some control over her exit momentum – she’s gone from a stationary start in Panel 3 to a moving exit in Panel 6.
Also, it seems to confirm that her exit body-pose is independant of the start position (Raising the question of if she could “vorp” a limb into position without the rest of her body, or at least by “vorp”ing into the same location she started with only a partial change of pose)
I begin to think that the majority of supers have Convenient Costume powers, no matter how unrealistic that might be. The only one who doesn’t seem to is Achilles.
It may be that Achilles just has a Bad Power. In the same way that Wolverine has to get wounded all the time to show off his regeneration, Achilles has to have his clothing get torn up to show that he’s been exposed to things that would have been dangerous to others.
We know that Maxima’s powers protect her clothing, but I find myself wondering if that has always been the case. If there was a time when they did not, it would explain a -lot- about her strident Feminism.
Maxima has the body and looks normally associated with Supers in the ARCverse.
Imagine looking like that, and being in the military, a career that has always attracted more than its share of men with testosterone poisoning.
Now imagine if your clothing kept getting shredded or destroyed entirely when you used your powers.
I think the biggest problem with Achilles’s power is Achilles himself. He’s kind of an immature dipshit and seems to have questionable fighting skills. Sure, he’s a good meat shield but that’s about all he’s good for as he is. If he had a quarter of Math’s skill he’d be a lot more effective than he is now.
I think Achilles lacks motivation to be other than “merely OK” in the fighting department. His attitude probably comes from the same source; his power. He’s quite happy as is, useful enough in defensive work and a handy thrown weapon for those who can use him.
Maybe after actually getting into a real fight with real villains, he might ‘grow-up’ and take things a bit more seriously, figure that if he took even a few classes with any of the others (Math and Anvil prime teachers) he could be better, in the same reason why Harem is training to use her *vorp*ing more offensively
Imagine Archilles finally finding a baddie that can hurt him.
He’d grow reasonable pretty fast or freak out. Probably both.
Also, still, do we have his b-day or can we maybe assume he is actually THE Archilles?
If he is The Achilles, he still has his heel to worry about. Seems that ARC Achilles does not have this.
Well that one was an inferior prototype. He died. From being poked in the heel with something sharp! Achillies Mk II has been perfected. His biography, in the cast list, implies that he had a normal upbringing, and probably became immortal sometime in the eighties.
But, yes, the possibility remains that his normal upbringing was as judged by the standards of cave men, a hundred thousand years ago. It may be that his own, super granted, hairstyle was what gave the inspiration for the eighties looks, that followed his trend.
As for his musical taste, he may just go through phases.
Have you guys considered the possibility that he may simply be holding back?
After all, he jumped into the fight between Dabbler and Heavenly Sword fast enough to surprise them both and positioned himself precisely enough to intercept the point of a sword with his eyeball. That implies a level of physical abilities that should make him a pretty good fighter.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he was intentionally avoiding overt displays of his true capabilities to
a) make villains underestimate him and/or
b) make him seem (at least initially) less threatening to the public as part of Arianna’s campaign. They probably want to ease people into the realization that he is only a thick Austrian accent away from being a terminator. Much better to introduce him as “that wacky human wreaking ball dude”.
I agree that Achilles has untapped potential; after all, a guy that can head-butt a battle tank without even mussing his hair can punch anything as hard as he wants without injuring his hand. This effectively gives him a superhuman attack (albeit not extremely super). He can also jump (or be dropped) from great heights to attack with his mass alone–a 20-story bodyslam. I know I’m not the first one to mention it, but finding ways to exploit ‘restrictive’ powers is a fun exercise in creativity, almost as much fun as finding complicating factors that inhibit ‘overpowered’ characters.
What would be really interesting is if it turns out that Achilles is a dedicated pacifist.
I believe this kind of thing is why his strength is listed above regular human – not just workouts, but the ability to overextend without risking a clever enemy dislocating a bunch of his bones, the ability to punch knuckle-point first for maximum psi without breaking his knuckles, basically the ability to “swing for the bleachers” with every punch, because there are no consequences.
Well, except for being judo-tossed and then having a wall dropped on you, which you then have to dig out from under. But when does that ever happen?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen that happen in any comic book or movie. Not even once.
I doubt Zippy gets much play with the sort of line he tried using on Harem.
Actually, his ‘line’ implies that he is not a fast-shooter in bed, which is a good thing
True but he’s begging in a way that sounds like chicks don’t believe it.
A more confident line might be, “I’m whatever speed you need in bed baby.”
Because there’s nothing that says “love” quite like sneak attacking a complete stranger during her dinner, stabbing her friend and teammate in the foot, then slashing her arm, followed by a crude reference to one’s sexual prowess while passing out from sleepy gas. A real lady-killer there.
Or at least a lady stab-in-footer. And arm-slasher.
Are you sure Daphne is American? This page has her sounding more English/Australian with the ‘prick’ ‘wank’ name calling. Or maybe she is first generation American with British & Australian parents
i’m a 5th generation American. I tend to use English slang like wanker and bloody around others as it dose not sound as crude to me as American cursing… that being said i curse like a sailor in a whore house around my friends. so it could just be a habit as she is in “Public”
I demand a cursing contest with sailors and Syd included!
Been done already, just before the bank “robbery”. Sydney won. Everybody else, including the sailor, but especially the nuns, lost.
I use quite a few British terms myself. I do it for two reasons, 1) I watched a lot of Brit-coms when I was a kid. and 2) The look on someone’s face when I tell them to quit trying to feed me a load of Bollocks
Yeaup!
They are probably wondering why you would even want to eat that hack actress
Be nice. She is a self-confessed nerd. And proud of it. Which means she is cool enough that she could be a reader. You may have just made her cry!
Besides which, I like her.
… That’s a BULLOCK.
And the thread is a load of old codswallop.
And… everyone still knew which hack actress was talking about :P
Least she’s better that THING in those “vampire” movies.
To be honest I was not sure what you meant by ‘hack actress’, as I have never heard the term applied, other than to writers. I was going on the wordplay alone. So, I had a peek at her record. Two Oscars, a shed-load of other awards and three billion dollars of movie sales. I guess it means ‘highly successful, popular and critically well recognised actress’. ;-)
Loving Berry’s raspberry in panel 5 :D
Is Machie holding the knife between his fore and middle fingers in panel 5? And then switches to a more ‘tradtional’ grasp when he slashes Bodie?
Count the fingers. He has an awkward but normal grip on the knife. He corrected it as he swung at the Harem that zonked him.
Didn’t count his fingers at first, and hadn’t read the first page of comments
Was going on how the Praying Mantis creatures in D&D/Forgotten Realms have wierd 3-finger hands and daggers to match, and how comments went that humans couldn’t use their daggers, tried it with a combat knife held between the ring and middle fingers: while it is not as effective as holding it ‘tradtionally’ it is still usable
Slight corrections: it was with brothers boot dagger, and held it with middle finger resting along the flat of the blade with the ring and forefingers hooked over the crossguard and thumb and pinky wrapped around the handle
Once you get used to it, it provides more precise slashing. Try it: bend your fingers at the first joint from the knuckle, extend your middle finger and cover your pinky with your thumb
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1368 Take a look at the bottom right panel. The restaurant is on fire. No wonder Sydney and the prisoners are outside. Want to bet Sydney took some initiative and started carrying them out earlier? Then got joined by Harem after she equipped the troops?
I would say “special needs” are necessary with a speedster who can vibrate handcuffs off. Remember, “Non-Lethal” does not exist, only “Less Then Lethal”, meaning that everything has a chance of killing, but they use a risk management system based on need.
Heck, depending on his metabolism and how his powers work exactly. He might not be knocked out at all by a tranquilizer. It might simply slow him down to the point of “normal” human speeds.
The Deflector (Forb) might be useful for containment if Halo can upgrade it so she can be outside of it when she uses it.
And it might kill someone due to a drug allergy. Or it might kill someone due to being administered by someone other than a licensed medical practitioner.
I kinda gotta call bullshit on the legality of what is essentially a police force (if they were military they could not operate on US soil due to Posse Comitatus) drugging up people they arrest. They would get into so much legal trouble it wouldn’t even be funny.
Prosecutor: And so you drugged this man. Why?
Harem: He is a speedster and that was the only way to keep him from escaping arrest.
Prosecutor: But previously your team had used restraints on him, and that had worked, correct?
Harem: Only briefly. He is a speedster and was able to escape the restraints.
Prosecutor: You couldn’t have used better restraints? Or tried the restraints again?
Harem: Well, he is a speedster and used his powers to escape once, so it seemed likely that he could again.
Prosecutor: And just how fast does a person have to be to be qualified by your team as “a speedster?”
Harem: Um, we really don’t have that defined specifically.
Prosecutor: So maybe he isn’t “a speedster?” I mean, given that the label is so vague…
Harem: Um, I guess.
Prosecutor: So you decided to drug the man because he may or may not have fallen within the undefined bounds of a vaguely defined term?
Harem: Um, yes?
Prosecutor: At any time did you ask the prisoner if he had any drug allergies?
Things don’t go well from there.
So basically, bad guys are free to do what they want because they might have an allergy to being constrained? o_O
Not gonna work like that. Those arguments have been shot down regarding taser and stun gun deaths. The team at Arc SWAT are taking all sensible precautions, more and better than most police in fact. Someone dies from the tranq or injuries incurred stopping them it’s all the same legally. Any PD that tried an amateur hour stunt like that would be in the judge’s chambers stat. And come out smelling of BBQ sauce after being roasted.
+1
No one has an allergy to a taser. So yes, it will work like that. If you disagree then I’d like to see a case where drugs were used to “restrain” someone.
Chemical restraint is in common use in both hospitals and prisons. Although, you are right to say that it is controversial. But it both works and is legal.
There’re groups who’re more sensitive about them and not directly recognizable such as hearth patients, so while there’re no TASER allergies there’re TASER intolerances
Actually, what they have to worry about is Wrongful Death lawsuits when they accidentally kill people with their sedative.
There could be another legal wrinkle to deal with. It can be argued that criminals “opt in” to being hit with whatever non-lethal methods the police want to use when attempting to subdue them. If you don’t want to be hit with a Taser, all you have to do is surrender.
What the police use to restrain you once you have been arrested is a whole different kettle of fish. At this point questions about proper health and safety become more relevant.
Which they only need fear if they have been incompetent. If Archon have followed sensible protocols, in choosing and testing the sedative, training the personnel and optimising the procedures they are instructed to follow, and ensuring that they are complied with, then the risks have been minimised.
Assuming they have done that, the chances of a problem occurring, in the first place, are low. And, if they do occur, the courts will agree that all reasonable precautions were taken, in order to contain an extraordinary threat. It would be deemed an accidental death, not a wrongful death.
If they chose their drug badly, and it is dangerous. Or Harem is untrained. Or she does not get the victims into a proper recovery position soon, then they do indeed have to fear lawsuits.
To my knowledge there is no sedative the FDA has ruled to be safe and effective for use without medical supervision. You most certainly cannot buy any such thing over the counter. I don’t believe you can get such a drug by prescription either.
Harem is 19 years old. There’s no chance she has a medical degree. I don’t believe she could be a qualified anesthesiologist at the age of 19 either. I’m pretty sure she couldn’t be a Registered Nurse. She isn’t qualified to administer sedatives nor to monitor patients under sedation, and I do not believe that a heart and respiration monitor is sufficient medical gear for the task.
Remember that Harem cannot carry another person when she teleports. She can just barely teleport Peggy’s gun. She couldn’t fetch a real doctor if something were to go wrong.
I would say Archon would be very liable for a Wrongful Death suit if someone died, and I think it’s actually pretty likely someone would.
There is no minimum age limit on entry to institutes of higher learning. You can, and do, find gifted individuals who join, even the most elite establishments, as young as twelve. And it only takes seven years to complete medical school. Sufficient for the requirement to administer sedatives.
That is without taking into account the fact that Harem is a super-hero. You are seriously underestimating her power here. You need to add together the total age for all of her bodies, to find out her learning potential. She could have completed medical school in a couple of years, if she wanted to!
We do know Harem is still studying in college. What we don’t know is how many degrees she’s studying for… or already completed.
Not really. Harem’s ability to be in 5 places at once would allow her to knock out a lot of non-core classes which have no prerequisites, but it wouldn’t help her at all for core classes with prerequisites. Which is pretty much every core class. Harem might shave something like a year off of a degree path by using her 4 spare copies to complete the English/Language/History/Social Studies etc. non-core classes for a particular MS degree. If I recall the course load needed for my CpE degree, it was something like 12 credit hours in each of 2 non-core categories, and then the bulk of the rest were all core classes. 24 credit hours is about 1 year saved for someone who can be in multiple places at once.
And that’s if she can afford it, assuming that she isn’t able to game the system by only having to pay for 1 of her persons to attend. If she had an adviser willing to look the other way and/or just not ask how she’s managing to take multiple classes at the same time she could probably get away with that, which would help a lot on the financial front.
It also means that she could have been cocurrently enrolled at a junior college while still in high school, getting those core classes attended to when she was 14, transferring to a university less than two years later (because she could take courses during the summer semester without difficulty) based on meeting transfer requirements, where she could then leverage similar strategies to pursue multiple degrees. The biggest barrier would actually be a financial aid system that isn’t designed to allow one person to pay tuition for 60 units worth of classes per semester.
You could, with the permission of the Dean, take more than 15 units at most colleges… but you have to be able to convince them you can handle the course load (Being a multicorporeal teleporter with five times the processing power of a normal student would probably be a compelling argument). At a junior college like I attended, tuition for 60 units would still be manageable (when I attended, tuition was 11 dollars a unit. It has since gone up, but financial aid options could still support it). At the four year level, though, many of those options are not as well supported.
I think another issue here is most police don’t have the ability to handle super villains. Posse Comititaus might not have the same oomph if the police ask them to come it to help, they follow the local law enforcement’s policies, demonstrate a direct need for their abilities, and have an enemy operating as a clear public threat.
The military can operate domestically, but it’s got its own rules. During his down time a soldier can work as a bouncer in a bar, he just has to follow local policies for instance.
Archon is a special unit. While Posse C. may be in their legal justification for existing, their main area of operation is extraordinary threats. Like the current attackers, losers though they may seem. They are not police, FBI, Army Special Forces or anything else currently in existence. They have their own Rules Of Engagement and their own authority to deal with a limited set of problems. I’m sure in certain cases they may be able to override regular authorities to keep them from throwing normal police or others into a meatgrinder.
Just because they use military lingo and customs does not make them soldiers. Achilles, Harem, Math and Halo are all civilians hired by contract and under no oath, as far as I can tell. The soldiers like Maxima have been assigned to, and work for, Archon. Dabbler is even more unique. A “special consultant”, who knows what kind of agreement she’s got. Waived the parking fee on her spaceship?
SCENE: The dark street, behind the Archon building. In the distance, fireballs and lightning bolts are lighting up the horizon, from the battle at the steakhouse car park. An empty parking bay, in the street, has a “Reserved” sign, on a chain, permanently blocking access to it.
A super-star destroyer intergalactic space ship hovers invisibly above the rooftops of the nearby shops. The likewise invisible tether anchored in the empty parking bay.
POINT OF VIEW: Binoculars looking at the space ship, somehow making it out, despite the invisibility. Following down the tether line. And zooming in on the parking meter. The dial is teetering on the brink of clicking over to “Expired.”
TRAFFIC WARDEN (voice): Mu hu hu. They said I was mad buying these binoculars, but they really can see the invisible. And, at last, that blonde cop is somewhere else, and I will get to impound that vehicle. It will be mine, all mine!
SCENE DETAIL: A sparkling light can be seen twinkling, next to the parking meter. It rapidly expands into a glowing circle. Sounds of gunshots, lightning bolts and fireballs can be made out, faintly, even from across the street. A purple hand reaches out of the glowing circle, and inserts a coin into the meter. The hand withdraws, back into the circle, which starts to close up again.
TRAFFIC WARDEN (voice): Darn it, foiled again! (VOICE RISING TO A SHOUT) And that is cheating!
+1,000 I can’t stop laughing. and I know I’m gonna be coming back for another dose. Thank you Yorp. (hands you the half-full Scooby Snak box left from luring DaveB out of hiding).
Heh heh, that’s funny (but the correct phrase is “Curses! Foiled again!”)
“The military can operate domestically, but it’s got its own rules. During his down time a soldier can work as a bouncer in a bar, he just has to follow local policies for instance.”
Sure, a reservist can be a bouncer. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the military operating domestically. I’m surprised someone would even try to conflate the two situations.
This issue is handled in depth in comic #147.
Your line of questioning also assumes that Harem would call him a “speedster” and even if she did, that Archon doesn’t have a suitable legal definition for the word.
Or that Harem would even be subpenaed at all. Archon would bury a grandstander like that under a ton of Federal legal experts then let the pros from Dover do what they are overpaid to do. Harem and Archon are not poor citizens to be ripped on by shysters. They have the law WRITTEN to handle these little problems.
I thought the whole argument was poorly conceived. Experimenting with restraints would only give him further opportunity to injury even more people and he already made it perfectly clear that he would continue to so if given a chance. Archon had every right under the circumstances to use any reasonable means to make sure that his threat to them was negated, up to and including killing him if absolutely necessary.
More like this:
Prosecutor: So you drugged this man to keep him restrained weren’t there less dangerous options?
Ariana: We tried unearthly strong ribbons, but he melted them, so we concluded he was a huge escape risk and since he was one the few at the time who had effectively hurt someone, overly dangerous and no of the other methods we could come up in the little time we had seemed more effective and so less dangerous in general.
Prosecutor: Couldn’t you’ve tried handcuffs?
Ariana: He melted the ribbons and we had no reason to suspect he couldn’t do that with handcuffs.
Prosecutor: Have you paid attention to his medical risks?
Ariana: When Arc Light identified him they searched for information in this regard, but as we just established we had little time. Also medical records are secret even to government agencies, so legaly getting access to them in the heath of battle can be challenging.
Prosecutor:…
I think Harem could benefit from you taking the time to develop some new visuals for her teleporting, most especially if you want to show off her “Port-Fu Fighting”. The Harem porting in and porting out appear identical, but one is intangible and the other is striking at the bad dude.
Maybe… Out-porting Harem appears purple-shaded, no halo effect, and is by that point intangible.
In-porting Harem is coloured normally, but has the purple halo effect, and is solid.
EDIT: Looking back a third time, I can see you’ve done the out-port in white outlines and the in-port in black, but that’s a bit… “zhoashel” ;)
Yeah, noticed that as well
:facepalm:
Oh! I did not notice the different outlines at all. Glancing back through the archives, it seems the white-out and black-in, has been happening all a long. Now I know what to look for, it will help follow things.
Still, it could have been made a little clearer. Maybe a different ‘noise’ for vorp-in and vorp-out would help?
“VORP” and “YORP”, maybe?
Maybe *vorp* in, *prov* out
Didn’t Nightcrawler “fmab” a couple times under weird conditions?
So if you got the super-villains of the last two pages together, would that be a Heavenly Mach?
If “arm slicing wank” is the best Harem can come up with, perhaps she should consider going to Halo for some lessons in Cursing 101.
A teleporter could potentially do a lot of damage depending on if they can teleport items independently of themselves and into other objects. But I think Achilles would have issues with that even if he had Math’s level of skill. If a sheet of metal just appeared where his neck is he might find it problematic for a second and then he’d be beyond worry.
It is the sheet that would have problems, not Achilles. Achilles may not have the most exiting power set going. But what he does have is a very very good version of it. And this is in comparison to other super heroes. Weaker ones being merely able to withstand being in the middle of a nuclear explosion.
Have a look at the ratings scales. They go from one to five. Five being “the best known to exist”. Bear in mind that the firing range demo showed that Maxima and Halo can easily withstand a blast akin to that of a small nuke. Yet they are both weaker than Achilles.
Achilles’s invulnerability is a six. It is not a relative ranking. It is an absolute one. He cannot be harmed.
…except possibly for that one thing nobody expects. (Ref: Balder the Brave and the great missletoe prank.)
Best case scenario the metal is sharing space in which case he only has to contend with air and blood getting through the sheet of metal in his neck. Worst case it replaces the flesh physically separating the head from the body.
Steel does not have an offence rating of 6. It cannot overcome a defence of 6. Not even with the aid of teleportation. Harem, and probably other teleporters in this world, cannot teleport into a solid object. The ‘port would fail, and they would remain in their starting location.
If Lee Press on Nails’s clam was true, then his claws have an attack rating of 6. Those would be a danger to Achilles. As for the steel, it certainly could be used to provide a blockage in Achilles’s throat, as you suggest. An attempt to block his veins though, would fail, I suspect. Simply because his blood vessels are just as invulnerable as the rest of him.
So, whatever ill effects there are to two sets of matter attempting to occupy the same space, it is the metal that will suffer, not the blood. And, that effect is likely to be a failed teleport, rather than an atomic explosion, or the like.
But the airway obstruction could be problematic, depending on how Achilles derives his energy. If he gets some source of super-powered energy, allowing him to remain mobile, then a blocked throat is simply irritating.
On the other paw, if he has to metabolise food, air and water, just like the rest of humanity, in order to make energy, then that obstruction could cause him to gradually slow down. Although he will be able to keep going a lot longer than normal humans, because the toxin build ups that would kill us fast, from lack of oxygyen, would have no effect on him.
Likewise he can burn fats that would be toxic for us to do without being able to metabolise the harmful side effects.
But, eventually, he would slip into a a coma, once he had burnt up those reserves. No idea how long that might be. Minutes, hours, days, or possibly weeks.
Importantly though, it will not harm him. The dehydration, the lack of oxygen and starvation would only be a temporary irritation. Eventually the steel plate will corrode and he will be able to breathe again. If there is any atmosphere. If not, say if he had been dumped in space, he need merely wait until enough matter is attracted to him, that a new planetary object is formed.
Sooner or later life will emerge. Hopefully some of it will produce oxygen for him. Water is pretty common, so he can get that. Then he can encourage things that taste nice and provide him energy to grow.
Worst case scenario, it would incapacitate him a few billion years.
Think of Achilles cell walls like Sydney’s shield, you cant normally get through but with the right power you can get around them. You could also teleport him somewhere where he can’t breathe. I’m sure If he got transported into orbit, he’d be a perfectly intact corpse.
exiting= exciting.i love this comic a lot but um .. wouldnt somebody who moves fast enough to burn through the rope, burn his clothers too? Too if he is fast it dosnt makes him imune to heat so he might have no some verry nasty burns .. maybe at places where you really dont want to have those
Where speedsters are involved, you kind of have to accept the hand-waving. Like kaiju, real-earth science doesn’t physically allow for their existence. We just go with it anyway.
Because it’s cool.
He could have had his clothes specially tailored from a Nomex/PTFE blend, or had an anti-personal-friction spell put on them by a jobbing wizard. In the Super genre there as many explanations for the naked-speedster conundrum as there are speedsters. I like the Incredibles explanation: ‘It took some effort butI finally found a material…’ No need to mention it by name, just establish that such a thing exists in this paradigm and move on.
I’m not sure the heat explanation. You need to worry about tensile stress along a particular a orientation to tow an asteroid, and shear from the other to resist slicing.
Well that was a quick fight, good that guy went down fast and hard.
Hit from two sides before he could fully recover. That’s how to deal with the dangerous ones.
True, personally while he is down I’d cut off one of his arms so he can only use one arm, that or both his legs. But I doubt they would do that, I’m just a very vicious monster is why I would do such a thing.
Good guys use restraint. Or restraints in this case. Besides Zippy may enjoy it, in which case Dabbler just gained a stalker disadvantage. :-P
If one Harem gets wounded and then de-teleports, does the wound disappear or is it persistent? Will that Harem still be wounded when she is reproduced, or does another Harem have to take the hurt? Does the effect of a wound diminish if she de-ports her four extras to boost her strength and (presumably) stamina? DaveB has mentioned that when one gets hurt the others can feel it, but what if the injured one disappears, does the pain disappear as well?
Okay, I went back to Dabbs’ Science Corner and somewhere in that neighborhood somone else asked the same question, where I found it heavily suggested that when Daph pulls in an injured copy it ‘reverts to form’ and is reproduced uninjured.
This is wrong, and DaveB, if you’re perusing the comments way up here in the nosebleeds, I think you need to change it. This little foible gives Harem an ‘insta-heal’ power, which is too much to add to her existing suite. Do that and you’ve created a character who is more powerful than Wolverine, Nightcrawler, and Multiple Man rolled together. Maybe even more powerful than Deadpool, because there’s only one of him (should be none of him, but I know he has his fans out there).
That question has already been answered, on page 1 of this issues comments. Twice. Here is one of them.
Thanks, Yorp. I don’t read the comics until 2100EST most nights, so when I’m perusing the comments there are already enough that I miss whole blocks.
My quibble is now satisfied.
My pleasure. Glad I could be of help.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news (actually, that’s false: love being the bearer of bad news :P), but there are indeed more than one Deadpool, one of them is even a canine
And nothing is more powerful than Deadpool, he even did something Captain Ahab couldn’t do: kill Moby (let’s see that wannabe Dudshite do that!)
There’s even a Deadpool that’s a head! And another one that’s a chick. Plus he married a succubus so there may be even more little Deadpools running around pretty soon. Trick or treating, talking to the voices in their heads, having conversations with us. The possibilities abound.
Yup, the Headpool is a Zedpool (a zombie head, the last of it’s kind)
And let’s not forget the evil Dopplepool that is made up from all the disgarded parts of Deadprime
Mach my words- he’ll be back!
He should do a couple run-throughs before he tries again.
He should realise that he has been out matched. But quite a few readers have been matching up the villains. So we may yet get to see a re-match. For now though he will be issued with a matching set of prison clothes.
Unfortunately for him, it looks like this is game, set, and….
Little known fact: some of the Harem have their sensory input sharing mirrored compared to the others.
Sorry, but could you re-state your point and make it a bit clearer? Are you saying that some of the Harem are better at sharing sensory input between themselves than others?
Sounds like he’s saying that some versions of Harem will rub their left arm in sympathetic/psychosomatic pain when another Harem’s right arm is hurt.
DaveB, now that you are back from holiday, firstly I hope you had a great time. Very impressed that you kept the comic updated, even whilst on holiday. I am sure folks would have been ok with guest art, or the like. But your dedication was much appreciated, none the less.
Secondly, I had a suspicion that the positions the villains are in would be dangerous for them. Not as dangerous as being in a fire mind. Getting them out of a building that is structurally unsound, due to collapsed ceilings and supporting members, plus the apparent fire, is much more important.
So the above comic is fine. But both as a police officer, and as a presumably qualified combat medic, Harem would know that a face down position, whilst often used for a conscious prisoner, is not compatible with the optimal recovery position,* for an unconscious one.
However, the addition of restraints complicates the issue considerably. As you cannot place a handcuffed individual in the normal recovery position. So I did a quick search and found what looks to be the definitive article on Restraint Asphixia. Of which, the third part is the most useful as it shows the correct position, namely on the side.
We may not get another panel of the restrained villains, but if we do, and you want to be strictly accurate to best procedure, Harem should have re-positioned them, as per the reference photo, in the latter link. Although it goes on to saying about removing restraints, I take that as being only if suffering medical complications. Super villains would need more precautions than regular criminals, not less.
So the double whammy of sedatives and mechanical restraints is wholly appropriate. So long as they are being constantly cared for by a suitably qualified medic. I think the arguments that other commentators raised, about sedatives, are sound enough, to preclude their use by other personnel, unless there was a medic or doctor providing guidance, as to dosage, and standing ready to take care of them.
* Google “Recovery position images” if curious. But that would not apply to prisoners in handcuffs.
Obviously, they use either M98, or M100…
M98B. But the details are classified, unless you have vermilion level clearance.
Certain chemicals don’t leave the body due to metabolism, and require their chemical lifetime to break down properly.
Others force the metabolism to break them down at a stabilized rate (as in a speed limiter).
I don’t think the above mentioned are very usable in any anesthesia, as they’d either cause more issues for a high metabolism target, or keep them out for an expected period of time… if such studies went through in their timeline.
I think the only ones we, the nonpowered universe, use can be metabolized because it guarantees the product leaving the body if the dose is reasonable. Gotta pass those safety standards ya’ know.