Oh my, it's quite the shift in opinions since Monday but that's fine, I wouldn't like it if the win was too easy but now that I'm all well rested & rejuvenated it's time to cook!
One funny thing about 90% of these responses from the pro bleach side is that they get destroyed by merely repeating my original blog, their arguments are mostly "nuh uh" "but what about this other location" and the rest are whining
and while it's easy to respond to it just becomes repetitive & frankly quite annoying but nonetheless let's get into this
"The problems with Las Noches are the same as the ones for Seretei"
It is not.
They are not
REMOTELY similar.
Honestly this is just cope made to somehow make them look similar because it is easier to say yes to statements for seretei and having equated them would boost Las Noches's chances of evading a downgrade when in reality Las Noches does not have 1/10 of the supporting arguments but has 10x the problems as Seretei had, matter of fact allow me to go into detail.
- Seretei (MANGA) has heavy visual size fluctuations. Las Noches does not. (Your key takeaway from this line should be that one aka seretei can be argued to be untrustworthy in it's visuals while the other cannot due to not having the same problems)
- Bad Seretei Shots were drawn relatively earlier during bleach's run. Las Noches was released later down the line when we see Kubo's art style in generally develop and come into it's signature shape which funnily enough after that arc the SS stopped fluctuating aggressively as seen in tybw (MANGA) explaining why only the early part of the story had those bad fluctuations
- The tiny shots of Seretei contradict multiple factors like mountains, training grounds, forests, first division tower it conflicts with more things beyond just a size implying statement, it conflicts with the sheer existences of structures confirmed to be in it that would not fit in the smaller shots within the seretei, Las Noches on the other hand conflicts with nothing aside the fan extrapolation of Nel's statement (Again this would not be contradictory because we were never given a size statement to even conflict with)
- Seretei also has much more statements, LN has 1
"We should calculate with destruction statements and no visuals to circumvent the issue"
This is a bad proposal because it treats the visuals like they're inferior forms of evidence, I'm not even gonna settle for this because why would we pretend the smaller more explicit & consistent size is not present?
The sizes don't fluctuate so you can't cope like you do with the Seretei (the reason it is almost valid in those scenarios is because with massive fluctuations you destroy the concept of a "true size" something that exists for LN but not Seretei) so that leaves you with 0 reason to not use the visuals other than "i want big numbers on the profiles" if you're gonna shift to calcs with destruction statements and no visuals, you'd have to shift to just base-fragmenting a hollow castle with those weak ass statements, which is gonna shit on the joule values anyway, if you're gonna accept a downgrade you might as well do everything in the honest way and take the overall size downgrade too lmao
"Physics / Scientific Factors are too niche"
Why are you using something niche as a one-off timeframe statement, you are thinking Kubo deep down in his mind did a distance calc to find the accurate size but you're also dismissing hypoxia, atmospheric pressure, atmospheric gas physics for being niche
and why do you get to decide which level of niche is fine or not?
why can't we go all the way?
conversely why can't we stick to basic in-your-face evidence like the visuals?
also why do you use formulas rooted in physics itself like the KE formula for calculations? do you think Kubo calculated & intended for the characters would be 50 bajillion petatons or kubo just wanted to draw cool dragon ball esque explosions
why is this fine but not that?
when does taking "niche" implications seriously become illegal and when does it become legal?
why do YOU get to decide that? if things the author never thought of are invalid then gut every god damn calc in bleach
if things kubo thought of [in a provable manner] are fair game let's use hypoxia and atmospheric pressure to gut these sizes as they were inserted by kubo and emphasized to be problems in bleach.
every god damn pro-bleach argument is just being hypocritical and pretending the opps won't notice, you don't HAVE a standard of evidence, the standard keeps constantly shifting based on whatever gives you the biggest numbers
"As for your last paragraph, Can we even use this as a genuine argument?, when the person who put kenpachi there has the power to make anything, he imagines a literal reality lol. Gremmy literally put kenpachi in an outerspace HE created and imagined the effects happening to him inside said space so obviously, he would be affected. And even if he couldn't survive outerspace none of your argument shows that the same rule would apply to reishi world like hueco mondo, when it doesn't apply to soul soceity a high attitudes."
This argument is genuinely pure cope, Gremmy does not imagine effects on Zaraki, Gremmy imagines situations and puts Zaraki in them otherwise he'd skip the process of transferring those attacks or effects to him and induce it on his body but no he had to launch a meteor, he had to physically BFR the guy and physically shoot those bullets, if he could just induce those effects of making his opponent burst like paint splatter as he did
here in
chapter 572 but he can't do that with stronger opponents as he's shown to never do it on top of having another situation where he was
stated to be unable to do it.
"Nel's statement and the depicted size cannot co-exist"
I agree, throw out the inconsistent one that had less weight to begin with (spoilers it's Nel's statement)
Don't try to argue "Muh Narrative!!" argue what is more consistent, argue what is stronger and you'll have a very very simple stress free conclusion
Deadass the only argument [some of] you have is just repeating "oh but heavens no it contradicts the sTaTeMeNt" in different flavours, either that or going back to piggyback off of seretei again, it's a forced way of trying to make the argument seem bigger and more meaningful than it is
"this is a built in rule, this whole thread should be disregarded as irrelevant."
This is just some hilariously weak cope made to avoid addressing uncomfortable truths, 0 discussion rules were placed regarding statements> visuals, not a single soul has to respect this, it was merely added as additional argument in an overall accepted blog that most staff skimmed,
Do not try to stretch it to be something it is not.
"Statements > Visuals"
It's odd to say visuals are also drawn by the author have less value than his words. Statements can contradict visuals, we can conversely take visuals into priority. We can do it for multiple reasons, one particular one is visuals are the only way author can express his imagination on the design he choose for something. Statements that he gives are not direct either, they must also be interpreted, now, how do you prove that your interpretations of his statement is the same as his? What if by showing visuals of the object he directly tells you his own interpretation? But nah, we gotta think we know better than the author himself.
"Kubo intends for them to be big and only chooses the timeframe method to portray this"
We have seen Kubo list sizing values countless times in other places why not here?
We also have notable examples of Kubo being numerically precise when need be :
As you can see Kubo's style of writing isn't vague, when he wants for something to be xyz value in meters, joules or degrees celsius he will make sure to make it known with numerically precise statements so why can he not do the same with these structures, surely timeframe statements arent all he's capable of if he wanted to
Seretei
I personally honestly did not want to downgrade the Seretei or argue about it & genuinely wished someone else would take care of it but if you're gonna keep up making these forced comparisons with it and the Las Noches when the only thing they have similar is travel time statements with all else being entirely different then fine, we'll talk about the Seretei, specifically let's talk about the timeframe statements
Yoruichi says it will take
10 days, what most bleach fans (or at least Infinite9Luck from the looks of it) are arguing is that because Kubo did it in one area it must mean he thinks the same for every other location that might get similar statements and they are also arguing this is Kubo's desire to showcase the size of these structures is by using these timeframe statements since he did so in another location
Yoruichi says it will take
10 days to get to one gate from the other but
- Ichigo went from the 11th division to the center of the Seretei within a single day with breaks in between and after fighting Ikkaku and Renji, this debunks the 10-day Myth.
- His friends Chad, Orihime and Uryu reached the center of the Seretei from near the edge within the same timeframe, the latter two were under disguises, moving at a much slower pace to blend in avoiding most fights aside from Jiboro
- Ganju arrives literally beside Rukia inside the castle at the dead centre in chapter 115
- All of these events happen before the Bankai Training Day in chapter 118, Yoruichi there mentions that is the third day of theirs ever since they got into the Seretei which is nowhere near the time they are supposed to take
Funny how the narrative completely implodes on itself when you take into account how practical values massively differ from theoretical/fanfictious ones but there you go, the timeframe statements you fight your life to defend aren't the objective undeniable word of god most bleach fans swear it is. There is a lot more
all of this woulda been much easier if you treated these timeframe statements to be what they are [worldbuilding statements] and not make them what they aren't [size statements], there's a few more events that make yoruichi's statement questionable like seeing Hanataro travel these country sized distances within less than a day in the same arc, captains doing the same prior to ichigo and friends arriving inside as well.
So from the last two sections we learn two things, if Kubo wanted to showcase size he would use size statements like he does for all else & his timeframe statements get contradicted by visuals and real time travel not taking that long & are pretty much unusable cope.
Kubo
When you have an idea, just listing it out as a statement mention does not expose you to all possible repercussions that the idea can have, having years of drawing experience & drawing that structure multiple times however does, it gives you a fair idea. If there are repercussions like "hey this tower is not supposed to reach the god damn moon!" you can spot it easier in art than in statements you don't care about outside one scene and are never important again where as shit art can call his skills as an artist into question, when you do uncover these issues you can easily redraw freshly but with statements you don't get the full extent of things.
BLEACH Volume 3 Author's Notes Section
KLUB OUTSIDE Q&A #126
KLUB OUTSIDE Q&A #171
As you can see Kubo is not some god who factors in everything, he forgets shit, a lot of shit, he's human after all, especially the not-in-your-face-levels-of-explicit-details so these backwater timeframe statements that similarly and most likely didn't get factored in for size should be universally dismissed in bleach's case from that let alone the visual contradictions
And the other part keeps getting ignored but I will keep bringing it up every time. If you're looking for objective powerscaling you should look at what is really shown and stated within the series instead of trying to guess the intentions of a 30 year old man from Japan who gets only
two hours of sleep & doesn't go outside that you never met in your life during the time of his writing where he was juggling a dozen different plot points at once. Appeal to author intent is a disgustingly dishonest coping method to make up for lack of feats.
Responses to Agna
I didn't just say "I disagree", I gave an actual argument based on our general standards, that I'd hope y'all hold consistent views on
disagree with this reasoning. I view it like video game graphics. Just because a character is shown as being 1/10th the size of a city, doesn't mean that destruction of half of that city should be put at only High 8-C. Especially if there are statements indicating that the city is actually large.
I don't think doing so is "using visuals to upgrade, and dismissing them when used to downgrade". Unless there are other cases here I'm missing. It's using statements to get some important raw values in a calculation, then using visuals to derive the rest, rather than starting from visuals alone.
No staff members responded to this.
Here is the issue Agna, you bring up these "unresponded posts" as if there are arguments that were not debunked
but what you actually quote is just personal super subjective viewpoints
"i think" "i view it as" That's not giving me or others much to work with
It's not debunking our arguments it's just Nuh-uh-ing what we say
plus your video game line is just a very general ass statement that doesn't really sound very strong when we put in Las Noches implications, if you ignore the boatload of issues to minimize them then yeah it obviously is gonna sound better
your second line is purely opinion based, it's neither evidence nor argument, it genuinely proves nothing
I think it really is like that sort of thing, because the issue ultimately comes from two panels where objects are a few pixels in size, when they should be 1 or fewer pixels in size. That's a common issue with showing size in drawn media; they want to show that something is large, but still have recognisable things as a point of reference. Unless they do some ultra-zoom stuff, these sorts of contradictions come up fairly frequently.
Here is the issue, I countered this in the blog itself, one or two cases is fine to dismiss but against back to back to back shots that are aggressively consistent? then you don't really get to play that poor excuse, especially when there are many scenes doing close ups on Ulquiorra on those columns focusing on him directly with him having the same ratios to the pillar, also like you said they are drawn to be points of reference [to emphasize scale] then why can't we treat them as just that, you're right here they are points of reference, that's why Kubo's added those to show how big it is, the other wank method happens to be a bajillion times bigger than what the author intended
I mean yeah, I would treat that Candice statement as an anti-feat. Whether she should actually be downgraded just depends on how well-supported the higher feats she scales to are, and how consistent her scaling to those other feats is.
That's good if you subscribe to the idea of what is more supported, what is more consistent id what deserves to take priority rather than what kind of evidence is being shown [i.e. statement vs feat] then we can apply the same rule here to Las Noches and use the more consistent 5.34 km end, that's perfect, consistency ftw!
If both point in different directions, then the text is more deliberate and less prone to these sorts of mistakes, and so should be given priority.
I actually touch up on this in this post alone above there, the opposite of this is true, please read the paragraph titled Kubo
Damage calced very consistent thickness sizes that are close to each other, the only disruptive value is when you use the statement size.
truth nuke! yet another case of the timeframe wank being grossly outlier to everything else
I think this is a bad comparison. The difference between your measured visuals, and the statement, is 42x. The difference between a city and a continent is easily an order of magnitude even beyond that.
Given my concerns with the measurement methodology, accidentally drawing it 42x smaller than it should be seems plausible to me, and so I'd give the statement more credence. I don't view that as an "outlier", "less practical", or "more theoretical".
Here is your issue you are assuming the statement sized structure is the true size and then kubo is drawing it smaller, when in reality kubo never calculated what the size from said statement would be & drew what he initially intended it to be
You also have not debunked why it is an outlier because outliers are defined by 1-2 values that are drastically different from one ballpark, in this case the statement is the drastically different and the ballpark is the visuals. and you have not targeted this discrepancy you just said you don't view it as so
Fair enough, but even not using that stated size as the source,
measurements like this would still be significantly off from some others. That one would give a thickness of 70m if we assume a diameter of 5.34km, as the OP suggested.
Plus, looking at some other scans used in these calcs,
this one (from
this calc) has the dome about 1.54x taller than the surrounding wall, while
this one (measuring as in
this calc) has the dome barely 1.08x taller than the surrounding wall.
These are still big size inconsistencies!
aren't both of these from the statement? I'm not sure what the issue is here
I've just seen a lot of series that, even if they occasionally mention certain real-world limitations, forget about or misapply them in other scenes. Series can talk about the importance of friction and air resistance in some scenes, while completely ignoring it with sub-rel characters in other scenes.
Briefly mentioning loss of consciousness, alongside the variety of deleterious symptoms of a human being exposed to the literal vacuum of outer space, does not mean that I'd be certain that all conscious characters must be at altitudes below 15.2 km. A chimney plume being drawn is even less convincing to me.
What makes you think he forgot as opposed to him having the natural and passive understanding of things that shoot up whenever these problems arise and remove them from his scripts? I'm not gonna forget to add gravity suddenly, that's baked into my brain and when I think of a situation where a character mid air isn't falling my mind will automatically try to justify the gravity, also why are we guessing what he could have thought as opposed to what is shown? if we cannot trust the series to stick true to it's own rules and pre established information, why powerscale at all? do you not see the absurd red flags that arise with this mindset? might as well assume characters drop down in tiers if they're not constantly reinforced, also might as well assume kubo misapplied the size by drawing the 5.34 km version during the feats and the 235 km version during narrative, this way we can have downgraded calcs with the smaller LN size and you can have your big sizes as a show piece, sounds like a very good compromise to me
If an anime adaptation of a scene shows a character jumping 50 meters high in 0.5 seconds, but the original novel says their jump "reached a height of hundreds of meters", we could use the LN for the distance, and the anime for the timeframe.
Y'all just keep asserting that we're saying "THE VISUALS ARE COMPLETELY WORTHLESS AND UNUSABLE", when we're just saying that they're less reliable.
Unfortunately this is source material vs source material with 0 set precedent for one over the other as we established a few texts ago consistency matters above all. You think x is less reliable, I think it is more, I provide evidence for it, you stick to claims, it won't take a genius to see one side makes a more sound case.
In the case that this thread gets rejected, i do believe that a thread ban on the subject is well due.
This has been extensively debated since 2019, and every prior thread came to the same conclusion.
It's exhausting to defend the same points over and over again.
Hell na, you need several threads as evidence to justify a discussion rule, you had 1 since 2019 (7 year breather) and this brings newer arguments, you are deadass in zero position to be demanding a thread ban lmfao
: Kubo has a preference in art style
: Kubo said forget art & glaze one-off statements that conflict with every other possible thing in the story
