Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics' 11 11

[Prince Namor]

On 10/5/2024 at 12:29 AM, Zonker said:

It is hard to argue with the theory that if Stan didn't sign it, we can be 99% certain he didn't touch it.  Particularly after you showed us those examples of pin-up pages, paper doll cutout pages, etc. that nevertheless bore the Stan Lee sig.  

But it does seem this assigns a peculiarly fastidious "morality" (of a sort) to Stan of the late 1950s / early 1960s.  

"Well, I didn't have a plot conference with Jack beforehand, and I didn't re-write Jack's dialogue after-the-fact. So, I cannot sign this one, that would be wrong!  But hey, I can take Jack's Thor story and retell the plot to Larry over the phone so he can produce some new scripted dialogue, and that will let me sign my name to it as plotter, no problem.  Yeah, that's the ticket!  Excelsior!" 

I've always thought it would be simpler back in 1962 if Stan wanted to take credit for Jack's storytelling to just copy/paste the "By Stan Lee & Jack Kirby" signature from one of the early Fantastic Fours, and leave it at that. Inventing a role for Larry Lieber to play in the cover story just complicates the narrative, doesn't it? 

The quote from my book:

“…Goodman started pressuring [editor-in-chief and head writer] Stan [Lee] to have other writers do some of the stories. He wasn't sold on [the Marvel Method] of doing stories [in which writers would supply artists with a plot synopsis, rather than full script, allowing artists to tell the story's visual narrative with their own pacing and details]. He became concerned that Stan would have too much leverage over him, and he worried about what would happen if Stan ever decided to leave the company. Goodman wanted other writers as a back-up in case he needed them, so he ordered Stan to use other writers. ...

- Leon Lazarus, Alter Ego (December 2009)

All of the old time Atlas writers quit almost immediately - Leon Lazarus, Don Rico - because they saw what Stan was doing - taking plot credit to get half the pay, while they did all the work. Larry Lieber held on because... I mean what else was HE going to do? But Larry's writing was clearly terrible in the superhero books without Kirby, so it was easy for Lee to just push him out to do Westerns. 

Later on it (almost 40 years later) became convenient to say Lieber did that with all of Kirby's Monster stories, to try and discredit Kirby as a writer, so people wouldn't question Lee as the undisputed 'creator' of it all. Once people understand that Kirby wrote, drew, and dialogued all of those monster stories themselves - it's easier to see just how big a part he played in the storytelling of the Marvel Superhero Universe, and Marvel didn't want that.

[Ken Aldred]

There are also different versions of Hercules, the Greek Olympian and Roman pantheons, African deities such as Anansi,  Celtic and Slavic lightning / thunder deities, etc. all given a contemporary spin by other writers and artists.

So it isn't just the most metal of all pantheons that's been referenced down the years. (joking)

Edited October 4 by Ken Aldred

[Silver Surfer]

Haven’t read up on any of this but the title of this thread makes me sad. Stan was in charge had to make tough decisions and ultimately make money for the owners (like any job). I’m sure that ruffled feathers along the way but no one forced these artists to stay if they were unhappy. 

[jimjum12]

On 10/4/2024 at 3:16 PM, Silver Surfer said:

Haven’t read up on any of this but the title of this thread makes me sad. Stan was in charge had to make tough decisions and ultimately make money for the owners (like any job). I’m sure that ruffled feathers along the way but no one forced these artists to stay if they were unhappy. 

 

As an asde ...

*ahem*... If Stan was doing NONE of the writing at Atlas, why would Goodman, who allegedly cared nothing about Atlas anyway, want Stan to do LESS writing? That just seems a bit squeaky to me. A lot of work sure seems to be going into this Impressionistic portrait of ole Stanley Whiplash. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

... and what about all those Kid Gang comics that Jack came up with, selling millions, and just oozing with originality?

 

[Ken Aldred]

On 10/4/2024 at 8:33 PM, jimjum12 said:

 

 

 

... and what about all those Kid Gang comics that Jack came up with, selling millions, and just oozing with originality?

 

Good point.

I always liked Kirby's Brooklyn-style dialogue.

Edited October 4 by Ken Aldred

[Zonker]

On 10/4/2024 at 1:53 PM, Prince Namor said:

The quote from my book:

“…Goodman started pressuring [editor-in-chief and head writer] Stan [Lee] to have other writers do some of the stories. He wasn't sold on [the Marvel Method] of doing stories [in which writers would supply artists with a plot synopsis, rather than full script, allowing artists to tell the story's visual narrative with their own pacing and details]. He became concerned that Stan would have too much leverage over him, and he worried about what would happen if Stan ever decided to leave the company. Goodman wanted other writers as a back-up in case he needed them, so he ordered Stan to use other writers. ...

- Leon Lazarus, Alter Ego (December 2009)

All of the old time Atlas writers quit almost immediately - Leon Lazarus, Don Rico - because they saw what Stan was doing - taking plot credit to get half the pay, while they did all the work. Larry Lieber held on because... I mean what else was HE going to do? But Larry's writing was clearly terrible in the superhero books without Kirby, so it was easy for Lee to just push him out to do Westerns. 

 

Not sure that fits the timeframe.  The more complete quote from Alter Ego that I can see on the Leon Lazarus wikipedia page indicates this was later, in the mid-1960s, when Lazarus was a freelancer on Goodman's men magazines, and Goodman prevailed on Stan to have Lazarus write the Giant-Man story in TTA #64. 

Quote

Lazarus had two public credits during the 1960s Silver Age of comic books: the suspense-mystery story "Wes Wilson, Worry-Wart" in the American Comics Group (AGC) comic Unknown Worlds #6 (March 1961); and the Giant-Man superhero story "When Attuma Strikes" in Tales to Astonish #64 (Feb. 1965).^[12] His Marvel Comics credit, during the period in which the former Timely/Atlas began establishing itself as a significant force in popular culture, came about, Lazarus recalled, when publisher Goodman

...started pressuring [editor-in-chief and head writer] Stan [Lee] to have other writers do some of the stories. He wasn't sold on [the Marvel Method] of doing stories [in which writers would supply artists with a plot synopsis, rather than full script, allowing artists to tell the story's visual narrative with their own pacing and details]. He became concerned that Stan would have too much leverage over him, and he worried about what would happen if Stan ever decided to leave the company. Goodman wanted other writers as a back-up in case he needed them, so he ordered Stan to use other writers. ... Goodman told Stan to, 'Have Leon write stories.' Stan called me and up and asked if I was willing to come in and work there again. ... I didn't want to say 'no' because I was working for Goodman's men's magazines, and didn't want to lose the account. ... I only did this one story, because I wasn't comfortable with the way Stan wanted writers to work with the artists, though I see now how right he was.^[13]

 

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 10/4/2024 at 8:33 PM, jimjum12 said:

. and what about all those Kid Gang comics that Jack came up with, selling millions, and just oozing with originality?

 

 

[jimjum12]

On 10/4/2024 at 3:50 PM, Ken Aldred said:

Good point.

I always liked Kirby's Brooklyn-style dialogue.

I did too. I'm basically pulling Devil's Advocate here. For a good decade, if it wasn't Kirby, it wasn't in my collection. Boy Commandos was a very close second to S&K Sandman as favorite GA of all time. I'm glad for his family, whom Jack spoke lovingly of. My main concern is that too much focus on the petty trifling issues draws away at how cool Kirby actually was. True story, my pal Wayne had all of the GA Caps except #2. He ran into Jack, after a convention, in a smoky hotel bar, and waxed fanboy with Kirby for a couple hours. A couple months later, Kirby's personal Cap 2 turned up on Waynes's porch, autographed by the King. GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[Ken Aldred]

On 10/4/2024 at 9:04 PM, jimjum12 said:

I did too. I'm basically pulling Devil's Advocate here. For a good decade, if it wasn't Kirby, it wasn't in my collection. Boy Commandos was a very close second to S&K Sandman as favorite GA of all time. I'm glad for his family, whom Jack spoke lovingly of. My main concern is that too much focus on the petty trifling issues draws away at how cool Kirby actually was. True story, my pal Wayne had all of the GA Caps except #2. He ran into Jack, after a convention, in a smoky hotel bar, and waxed fanboy with Kirby for a couple hours. A couple months later, Kirby's personal Cap 2 turned up on Waynes's porch, autographed by the King. GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

What I liked about those stories as a kid, in the 100 pagers, was that the Brooklyn dialogue really made me feel that even though they were English language comics, they were comics from a far away country, quite different and fascinating.

[VintageComics]

On 10/4/2024 at 12:17 AM, Prince Namor said:

In my book, you'll find out who REALLY (most likely) influenced Kirby's look for Thor.

Jack Kirby did Thor TWICE before the version we now know. Lee never did. And Kirby never said he created Thor from out of thin air. He did say (from my book):

“I got a kick out of doing the Thor legend, which I researched.
I kind of did my version of it. They thought that Thor should have red hair and a beard, and that’s not my Thor. So I just went my own way.”

- Jack Kirby, August 1–3, 1970: San Diego’s Golden State Comic Con (San Diego, California)

 

Compare that to what Lee said:

“As all true devotees know, every superhero needs a special quality, a special weapon of some sort… and then I realized I could solve both problems (weapon and flying) at once - with a hammer!”

- Stan Lee, Origins of Marvel Comics, 1974

 

Thor having a hammer was certainly not Lee's idea. It was a part of the original Norse Mythology.

This is so frustrating. 

I have to say something. 

Your point above is a PERFECT example of how you stretch the 'facts' and twist the narrative in your direction without any actual substantiation to the accusation, call it 'truth' and call Stan a liar.

And then you say stuff like this:

On 9/20/2024 at 4:48 AM, Prince Namor said:

You can cry all you want about your hero. I'm going to spend the rest of my life shoving the truth right down the throat of the world.

 

The two quotes above are addressing entirely different things and you're conflating them to be about the same thing.

They're not. 

I've already shown how you did it with the Bullpen discussion, where you sidestepped the actual point of the discussion about Stan Lee was corralling and creating a Bullpen (whether virtual or in person didn't matter - it had intrinsic value in making the Marvel brand great) and you created a new vector of discussion on when/where the physical Bullpen existed - something nobody was discussing. All to discredit Stan when it wasn't warranted. 

The Thor discussion above is also a great example of how "facts" alone don't compromise "truth".

To discover the truth, you need to assemble the facts in an intellectually honest fashion. Each fact is really just a clue pointing in a direction and those clues need to be added up to come to the truth. The truth is a conclusion you reach when all the evidence has been weighed fairly. Objectively.

Two clues don't make a conclusion and cherry picking or slanting interpretations doesn't provide the truth. 

So unless there is more to add to those two quotes above, they prove nothing about the point you're trying to make, and I'll explain why.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Those two quotes are discussing two entirely different things and there is this vast ocean of possible interpretation between them. 

Stan isn't talking about Thor's look. he's talking about Thor's hammer and flight.

Meanwhile, Jack is talking about how Thor LOOKS. 

The two aren't connected. 

Let me articulate to make my point:

Everyone knows from grade school up, if you've dabbled in Norse Mythology AT ALL that Thor has a hammer. Even non-comic people know it. It's pretty much common knowledge unless you've been living under a rock and have never heard of Norse mythology at all. 

So by extension, it's preposterous to assume Stan is taking credit for giving Thor a hammer, especially when EVERY depiction in comics, which Stan and everyone around Stan would be aware of, has understood that Thor has a hammer!!

The assertion that Stan Lee thought up Thor's hammer is akin to Stan Lee taking credit for Superman's cape.

So there must be something else he's talking about...and he is: He also mentions flight. 

Did any of the previous iterations of Kirby's Thor contain flight?

Did the Thor in JIM #52 have the power of flight?

Did the Thor in Adventure Comics #75 have the power of flight?

I don't have the stories in front of me, and maybe someone else can confirm, but considering those previous iterations drawn by Kirby look like Vikings, and they're on ships, it doesn't seem that way. Thor wouldn't need a ship if he could fly. 

This means Stan Lee is saying in this quote, that he thought of using the hammer as giving Thor the ability to fly and combining it with his hammer.  

Well, how EFFING BRILLIANT was that idea? 

Flight is literally what made the character great. 

Without this power of flight, you don't have Thor swinging the hammer on the glorious cover of JIM #83 in an impressive display of power. You have JIM #52 or Adventure #75 Thor - BORING!

You don't have the fluid story movement or art, with lithe Thor flying from one location to another. You have a lumbering brute with physical strength walking from panel to panel.

You don't have the cover of JIM #89 which is considered one of the best covers of the 1960's by Marvel zombies. 

It's these sort of ideas and characterizations that Stan gave to characters that made them special and stand out. 

 

Yeah, I know. Stan Lee probably only did it over a 5 minute plot meeting.

Glen Danzig said he wrote his biggest hit "Mother" in 15 mins. How much should a genius be paid per minute?

 

Now if I'm wrong, and there's a quote where Kirby states that he gave Thor flight, well that's a different discussion but those 'facts' should be included in the discussion to make your point. 

But it's still a discussion that needs to take place. 

----------------------------------------------

I've had these debates with you for ages on a variety of topics and they always turn out the same way. 

You don't stay on point, you cherry pick information that's either out of context or incomplete, you redirect the conversation and you don't use the same scrutiny for your own "facts" that you do for those that disagree with you, and it's this intellectual dishonesty that pervades every discussion, which is the exact same thing every person who has disagreed with your conclusions have stated - both people who have read your book and those that haven't. 

Your subjective reasoning and malicious intent comes through in everything you write. And frankly, I wish I didn't need to write this or point it out, but it must be pointed out when you're trying to change history to suit your own subjective interpretation. 

Keep ramming it down people's throats. 

--------------------------------------------

Side note: Who was really responsible for using Primary colors in the final costume?

Was it Kirby or Lee? I ask because I've often written on these forums that I believe Primary colors are far more important than people realize, and that heroes that use primary colors for costumes are among the most popular heroes in comics. 

[KCOComics]

On 10/4/2024 at 4:04 PM, jimjum12 said:

I did too. I'm basically pulling Devil's Advocate here. For a good decade, if it wasn't Kirby, it wasn't in my collection. Boy Commandos was a very close second to S&K Sandman as favorite GA of all time. I'm glad for his family, whom Jack spoke lovingly of. My main concern is that too much focus on the petty trifling issues draws away at how cool Kirby actually was. True story, my pal Wayne had all of the GA Caps except #2. He ran into Jack, after a convention, in a smoky hotel bar, and waxed fanboy with Kirby for a couple hours. A couple months later, Kirby's personal Cap 2 turned up on Waynes's porch, autographed by the King. GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

The guy who ran my local comic shop had parents that moved next to Jack in the later stages of his life. 

They had no idea who he was or that their son idolized the man. They went for walks frequently,  Jack would pick up their garbage cans when the wind blew them down. They were just neighborly and friendly. 

When Jack died, they were shocked to see all the fanfare. They called their son in Connecticut and said "hey,  did you ever hear of this Kirby guy?" 

Anyway - by all accounts Jack was a really nice guy and really good neighbor. 

[VintageComics]

On 10/4/2024 at 6:18 AM, Prince Namor said:

And then there's this:

Unusual Tales #18 from 1959.

A magical cane with the power of Thor's Hammer in it...

EVERYONE borrows... not everyone steals credit and pay for the ideas they borrow.

Hell, some people don't even borrow - they wait for their artists to do it and THEN steal the credit and the pay.

Since you believe Kirby was responsible for everything about Thor, did Kirby attribute his ideas to this story?

Or did Kirby steal the idea from someone else and claim it to be his own?

[jimjum12]

On 10/4/2024 at 5:16 PM, VintageComics said:

Since you believe Kirby was responsible for everything about Thor, did Kirby attribute his ideas to this story?

Or did Kirby steal the idea from someone else and claim it to be his own?

Or did Stan, himself, rehash it, in an effort to make the Thor story a bit less "wooden"? GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[Albert Tatlock]

If Stan Lee can outfox even a prospective Nobel Prize winner like Sheldon Cooper, what chance do we mere mortals have?

[jimjum12]

On 10/4/2024 at 5:03 PM, KCOComics said:

The guy who ran my local comic shop had parents that moved next to Jack in the later stages of his life. 

They had no idea who he was or that their son idolized the man. They went for walks frequently,  Jack would pick up their garbage cans when the wind blew them down. They were just neighborly and friendly. 

When Jack died, they were shocked to see all the fanfare. They called their son in Connecticut and said "hey,  did you ever hear of this Kirby guy?" 

Anyway - by all accounts Jack was a really nice guy and really good neighbor. 

A bit of digression, but my "living next to fame" story happened when we were renting on a quiet stretch of highway. Behind our spot, down a long dirt road, stood an old house. Never much activity except when this skeletal, elderly woman would walk down the long dirt road, out to the mailbox by the road, to retrieve mail. Around midnight most nights, the attic lights would come on for most of the night. We were spellbound with terror. As t turns out, AUGUST CRABTREE lived there with his wife, Winnifred. He preferred working at night. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Edited October 4 by jimjum12

[Mmehdy]

On 10/4/2024 at 4:39 AM, Prince Namor said:

The case:

Journey Into Mystery #83, 84, 85 (first Thor stories)

Strange Tales #101, 102 (Human Torch stories)

Tales to Astonish #35, 36, 37 (first Ant-Man stories)

 

None of these are signed by Lee or Lieber. 

BINGO!

[Prince Namor]

On 10/5/2024 at 4:03 AM, VintageComics said:

This is so frustrating. 

I have to say something. 

Your point above is a PERFECT example of how you stretch the 'facts' and twist the narrative in your direction without any actual substantiation to the accusation, call it 'truth' and call Stan a liar.

And then you say stuff like this:

 

The two quotes above are addressing entirely different things and you're conflating them to be about the same thing.

They're not. 

I've already shown how you did it with the Bullpen discussion, where you sidestepped the actual point of the discussion about Stan Lee was corralling and creating a Bullpen (whether virtual or in person didn't matter - it had intrinsic value in making the Marvel brand great) and you created a new vector of discussion on when/where the physical Bullpen existed - something nobody was discussing. All to discredit Stan when it wasn't warranted. 

The Thor discussion above is also a great example of how "facts" alone don't compromise "truth".

To discover the truth, you need to assemble the facts in an intellectually honest fashion. Each fact is really just a clue pointing in a direction and those clues need to be added up to come to the truth. The truth is a conclusion you reach when all the evidence has been weighed fairly. Objectively.

Two clues don't make a conclusion and cherry picking or slanting interpretations doesn't provide the truth. 

So unless there is more to add to those two quotes above, they prove nothing about the point you're trying to make, and I'll explain why.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Those two quotes are discussing two entirely different things and there is this vast ocean of possible interpretation between them. 

Stan isn't talking about Thor's look. he's talking about Thor's hammer and flight.

Meanwhile, Jack is talking about how Thor LOOKS. 

The two aren't connected. 

Let me articulate to make my point:

Everyone knows from grade school up, if you've dabbled in Norse Mythology AT ALL that Thor has a hammer. Even non-comic people know it. It's pretty much common knowledge unless you've been living under a rock and have never heard of Norse mythology at all. 

So by extension, it's preposterous to assume Stan is taking credit for giving Thor a hammer, especially when EVERY depiction in comics, which Stan and everyone around Stan would be aware of, has understood that Thor has a hammer!!

The assertion that Stan Lee thought up Thor's hammer is akin to Stan Lee taking credit for Superman's cape.

So there must be something else he's talking about...and he is: He also mentions flight. 

Did any of the previous iterations of Kirby's Thor contain flight?

Did the Thor in JIM #52 have the power of flight?

Did the Thor in Adventure Comics #75 have the power of flight?

I don't have the stories in front of me, and maybe someone else can confirm, but considering those previous iterations drawn by Kirby look like Vikings, and they're on ships, it doesn't seem that way. Thor wouldn't need a ship if he could fly. 

This means Stan Lee is saying in this quote, that he thought of using the hammer as giving Thor the ability to fly and combining it with his hammer.  

Well, how EFFING BRILLIANT was that idea? 

Flight is literally what made the character great. 

Without this power of flight, you don't have Thor swinging the hammer on the glorious cover of JIM #83 in an impressive display of power. You have JIM #52 or Adventure #75 Thor - BORING!

You don't have the fluid story movement or art, with lithe Thor flying from one location to another. You have a lumbering brute with physical strength walking from panel to panel.

You don't have the cover of JIM #89 which is considered one of the best covers of the 1960's by Marvel zombies. 

It's these sort of ideas and characterizations that Stan gave to characters that made them special and stand out. 

 

Yeah, I know. Stan Lee probably only did it over a 5 minute plot meeting.

Glen Danzig said he wrote his biggest hit "Mother" in 15 mins. How much should a genius be paid per minute?

 

Now if I'm wrong, and there's a quote where Kirby states that he gave Thor flight, well that's a different discussion but those 'facts' should be included in the discussion to make your point. 

But it's still a discussion that needs to take place. 

----------------------------------------------

I've had these debates with you for ages on a variety of topics and they always turn out the same way. 

You don't stay on point, you cherry pick information that's either out of context or incomplete, you redirect the conversation and you don't use the same scrutiny for your own "facts" that you do for those that disagree with you, and it's this intellectual dishonesty that pervades every discussion, which is the exact same thing every person who has disagreed with your conclusions have stated - both people who have read your book and those that haven't. 

Your subjective reasoning and malicious intent comes through in everything you write. And frankly, I wish I didn't need to write this or point it out, but it must be pointed out when you're trying to change history to suit your own subjective interpretation. 

Keep ramming it down people's throats. 

--------------------------------------------

Side note: Who was really responsible for using Primary colors in the final costume?

Was it Kirby or Lee? I ask because I've often written on these forums that I believe Primary colors are far more important than people realize, and that heroes that use primary colors for costumes are among the most popular heroes in comics. 

Yawn.

Stan Lee didn't sign the first three Thor stories. (i.e. he had nothing to do with them)

If he'd have given Kirby ONE idea in the first three issues, he'd have signed the story as 'by Stan Lee'. 

 

And all that bluster above is nonsense. 

Which point have I made that is wrong?

YOU STILL HAVEN'T LISTED ONE.

[Prince Namor]

On 10/5/2024 at 4:16 AM, VintageComics said:

Since you believe Kirby was responsible for everything about Thor, did Kirby attribute his ideas to this story?

Or did Kirby steal the idea from someone else and claim it to be his own?

See THIS is the intellectual dishonesty.

a) I never said that Kirby was responsible for 'everything about Thor'. 

b) I DID question Lee taking credit for everything about Thor.

c) someone asked, what about the 'cane'?

d) I showed the comic above.

 

YOU create the straw man argument above. 

I say 'intellectually dishonest', but I may have to consider you have a reading disability as well. If that's the case, I apologize. 

[VintageComics]

On 10/4/2024 at 6:02 PM, Prince Namor said:

Yawn.

Stan Lee didn't sign the first three Thor stories. (i.e. he had nothing to do with them)

If he'd have given Kirby ONE idea in the first three issues, he'd have signed the story as 'by Stan Lee'. 

 

And all that bluster above is nonsense. 

Which point have I made that is wrong?

YOU STILL HAVEN'T LISTED ONE.

You're doing it again. Logic is an unbreakable chain and your chain links aren't connected. 

The post I replied to had nothing to do with the content of the stories. It had to do with who was responsible for Thor's attributes. 

You initially supplied two quotes saying they contradicted each other, and that the contradiction proved Stan Lee lied, and yet the two quotes were not even discussing the same thing. 

Now you're again sidestepping the discussion, which was who was responsible for Thor's attributes, and shifting it to the stories and concluding that because Stan didn't sign them he had nothing to do with creating Thor. 

So are you saying Stan Lee had NOTHING to do with the creation of Thor? Zilch? Nada?

And you're basing it on the fact that he didn't sign the stories?

[VintageComics]

On 10/4/2024 at 6:07 PM, Prince Namor said:

On 10/4/2024 at 5:16 PM, VintageComics said:

Since you believe Kirby was responsible for everything about Thor, did Kirby attribute his ideas to this story?

Or did Kirby steal the idea from someone else and claim it to be his own?

See THIS is the intellectual dishonesty.

a) I never said that Kirby was responsible for 'everything about Thor'. 

b) I DID question Lee taking credit for everything about Thor.

c) someone asked, what about the 'cane'?

d) I showed the comic above.

 

YOU create the straw man argument above. 

I say 'intellectually dishonest', but I may have to consider you have a reading disability as well. If that's the case, I apologize. 

Let me rephrase that, then.

So are you asserting that Kirby is responsible for ALMOST everything about Thor?

Or, to be more clear, can you clarify what Kirby is and isn't responsible for?

And if so, did Kirby steal the idea from someone else and credit it to himself, just as you assert Stan Lee does regularly?