Strength in Numbers

My opponent makes some really good points. I'll try to rebut them all.1000 men vs The heavily armed man with grenades, machine gun, and metal armor. The men could always tire him out by running around pointlessly, using other bodies as "armor" to protect themselves, throwing dead men upon the heavily armed man to distract him, only to have another man come from behind and steal the weapons to their own use. There's got to be at least one man who can come with that idea.The genius verses the armies of their opponents: this is an interesting prospective, but if the army had spies, *backup*, then they would find out about the weapons and try to scatter the population or attack the military itself. In addition, not everyone dies within just a single nuclear bomb.The hurricane is unbeatable. The asteroid is arguable, you did say the massive nuke could destroy an entire city. Plus, as you have mentioned, just one genius can destroy an army, imagine if a load of geniuses came together and invented a anti-gravity machine or a path-redirector massive-impact missile or something that manages to throw the asteroid off course, or do the opposite and change the path of Earth itself. Thus, a few seemingly powerless people combined together can defeat the asteroid. One billion caterpillars vs Pest control company. The problem here is that my opponent does not remember that evolution causes mutations that allow certain bugs to develop immunities. Even just one caterpillar can reproduce into the same gigantic population and force the workers to quickly develop a new chemical or else be covered with caterpillars while screaming in disgust.School of fish vs Shark. It is true that the fish would lose to the shark, but what about human capture? The humans could easily capture the shark in one try, while the fish are a bit of a gamble and some fish could get away if they noticed before the others. If all the fish swim in different directions, surely at least one of them would get away. Iron man versus the 15 men: I suppose I have to drop this point. Gulliver: okay, he was awake in the movie, and he was still captured. Same thing, not much of a difference there.As of Godzilla, certainly people had to team up to build the nuclear bomb. It's not like the government gave one genius the job of building the nuke. As for General Zod, since he seems to have the same powers as Superman, if people observed him enough they could certainly come up with the idea to trap him in a Kryptonite environment underground. With a bunch of people, this is certainly financially manageable. On the other hand Superman would have great trouble doing the same thing due to his same weaknesses as General Zod. This also shows that diversity is a key and that if we had multiple people it would be very unlikely they have the same exact weakness.Loads of fools vs few smart people: as I said before, "three cobblers can match up to Zhuge Liang". Their ideas are so diverse, one of them is bound to come up with a smart idea with all the other inspiration. Once again, I remind you all that if everyone has a little of some knowledge or objects, teamed up they can create a masterful plan or do something one single skilled guy couldn't manage to do.100 fools vs 3 soldiers: at least the 100 fools can run around for basic necessity while teaming up quite well. Sure, people will have to die, but ultimately more come out. On the other hand if even one soldier dies that brings a huge disadvantage to the triumvirate, changing it to a mere pair.Back to you, con.