NeoTengus

Yo I wanted address ur reasoning on people scaling to yggdrasil

No, not 'some people'. That's exclusively what google images provides as a reference for 'Splintered Tree' as an image search. In which case it always shows examples of tree trunks broken to the point where it leaves stumps of varying sizes.

The word splintered as a verb explicitly refers to making fragments of an object. The only additional caveat is that the fragments tend to be pointy/sharp. It does not mean break off a single sharp piece.

Click to expand...

Yeah and you know that google images isn't like an official source for all images right? All they do is take what words you put into an algorithim, and find random images from literally anywhere that they think may be describing what you are looking for. What if i find an image on google images of a "splintered tree" that doesn't show a tree broken to that extent? Would we still have to always assume the other ones are correct?

I find this argument completely fallacious, listing examples of something does not cite a general rule, this is a textbook example of the proof by example fallacy.

And even if it didn't why do you think images from random websites holds more weight than the actual definition, which is what Mimir was actually using?

No, I think thats ridiculous. We need to determine exactly to what extent the tree was "splintered", or we cannot even assume the splinter in question is big enough to even scale them to the entire tree.

Don't put words in my mouth please. I never said 'complete destruction'. Just destroyed. A tree broken in half is a destroyed tree. I'm not saying its violent fragmentation, let alone pulverization or atomization, but just basic entry level fragmentation--hell, saying they simply broke the tree in half would not be out of the question at all since not a single 'splintered tree' reference image shows anything less than that.

Click to expand...

What I mean't by that is we need a sure way to determine how much of the tree is broken. And again, definitionally, splinter doesn't necessarily mean broken in half.

Would anyone put up this sort of pedantic stonewalling type of questioning if a statement said a "the force of the blow splintered a planet?"

Click to expand...

Yes I 100% would, to calculate how much force is required to accomplish a certain feat, we need to be able to know to what extent the planet is splintered. Literally anyone who calc's feats like that, especially on this wiki, would agree with me.

He said "their clash so violently shakes the tree of life that it splinters." Again it takes a rather willfully irrational stance to take that to mean an insignificant piece of bark or a twig was shaken, such to the point that only an infinitely smaller piece of the whole structure was broken off.

Click to expand...

Again, nowhere does it say entire tree. I can just as easily say "That stick hit the wall and splintered". What would we determine splintered? How much of the stick? All of it? Half of it? Who knows?
You can say my stance is irrational, thats fine, but as long as neither of us see to what extent the tree is broken, we have equal interpretations. I would just apply Alder's Razor, and end the argument there.

If you have a single reference of the word 'splintered' used for any object, (so not limited to just trees) to mean a single, insignificant volume wise, sharp piece was broken off, I will gladly concede the point however.

Click to expand...

The impact splintered the wood on the house.
The board splintered under his weight.
Neither really give you insight on how much exactly it was destroyed.

But right now, 'splintered glass', or 'splintered boulders' all seem to yield the same sort of result as splintered tree for me in my searches. Which all seems to fall under the basic fragmentation definition of the wiki.

Click to expand...

Once again thats fallacious, I find it completely and utterly weird why you would prefer to appeal to google images, over the actual definition. Especially when the statement was presumably using the actual definition. Its completely beyond me.