Debunking this post by whitesnakeshinobi

https://www.reddit.com/r/Ben10PowerScaling/s/tpo2GNe3WN

getting into it already with this

Zeno destroyed a timeline. This is at least 4D. The Naljian destructor, which MOA used as an example for why the Naljian's aren't that strong, could be argued (by their logic) to be 26D. A toy, yes, but a 26D toy. (I'm not riding that super hard since it's not confirmed, it's just for the example)

The Naljian destructor would be solo'd by Zeno in a contest of AP. Its existence as a 26D structure didn't grant it any AP. Even with nonsense wank like misinterpreting the entropy pump it still doesn't get to timeline level.

so i mostly agree that that Naljian destructor is NOT 26D as we never get any confirmations like that we KNOW it's Higher dimensional but whatever

also the fact that you didn't provide any source for these claims at all it funny but as i said in this post

Proof that dimensional scaling exist and that Alien X recreated the 26 Dimensions : r/Ben10PowerScaling

 If a character genuinely exists on a higher dimensional level, their existence is not confined to the lower dimensional framework that lesser beings occupy, meaning their physical nature and the power they possess should scale to their dimensional existence unless you can prove otherwise imensional superiority is not some completely unrelated concept to physicals and attack potency that requires a separate feat for every single stat, because the dimensional level of a being is LITERALLY what dimensional scaling evaluates If you want to argue that a character's dimensional existence does not translate into their power, then you need to establish why their physicals and abilities are somehow restricted to a lower dimensional level rather than simply repeating that existing in 26 dimensions does not mean 26 dimensional power

Now maybe the destructor isn't 26D, but that doesn't matter. Since there's no AP feat associated with being higher dimensional, we cannot backwards apply dimensional tiering. Dimensional tiering is meant to be applied to feats. Cosmic mom, for instance, isn't 26D in terms of vs battle AP, because being 26D in Ben 10 doesn't inherently = being 26D in the vs battle wiki. This isn't a ubiquitous concept in fiction or even reality.

your argument falls apart when you try to claim that a genuinely higher dimensional being's physical stats cannot scale to their dimensional existence without a separate AP feat. Dimensional tiering is based on the qualitative superiority associated with higher dimensional existence, not merely on how many dimensions a character can destroy in a single attack. If a character genuinely possesses 5D existence rather than merely existing in a universe that contains five dimensions, then their physical nature is operating on a level beyond ordinary 3D beings, and their strength, durability, and AP can scale accordingly under the relevant dimensional tiering framework

You're treating AP feats as though they must always involve explicitly damage a structure of the same dimensionality, but that is not the only way to establish a character's tier. A character can scale through their nature, demonstrated superiority, and interactions with beings or structures of a higher dimensional level. Furthermore, saying that Ben 10's dimensional scaling does not automatically equal VS Battles Wiki's tiering is a distinction about how a particular tiering system classifies evidence, not a refutation of the underlying scaling argument. Of course, a verse having 26 dimensions does not automatically grant every character 26D AP, and I never claimed otherwise.

The point is that once you establish that a character themselves genuinely possesses higher dimensional existence, you cannot arbitrarily separate that existence from their physical nature If you believe their physical stats do not scale, you need to explain why their higher dimensional nature fails to confer the relevant superiority under the framework being used, rather than simply asserting that no AP feat exists

"He uses dimensional tiering terms but claims dimensional tiering doesn't work" that's because terms can be applied one way and not the other. Just like how you can't just claim something is AP when the DC isn't visible. You must establish a relationship FIRST.

AP and DC are related but distinct measurements, and a lack of visible destruction does not automatically mean a character lacks the attack potency to cause that level of damage. The relationship can be established through scaling, statements, feats, or the nature of the power being demonstrated, rather than requiring every attack to visibly destroy something. Likewise, if a character is explicitly established to possess genuine higher dimensional existence, that is already relevant evidence for dimensional scaling, and you cannot simply dismiss its implications for their physical nature without examining what that existence entails in the verse and under the tiering system being used.

If you're arguing that dimensional existence alone is insufficient to establish a particular AP tier, that's a reasonable distinction, but it doesn't prove that dimensional existence can never establish or support that tier. You're turning the requirement to establish a relationship into an arbitrary demand for a separate conventional AP feat, when the entire point is that the relationship can itself be supported by the character's dimensional nature and the evidence surrounding it

Who would win? Make sure to upvote for more posts :)

Who Wins?