- 3,881
- 1,114
I fully agree now
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And I've already explained how it being "just aimed at space and time and not the spaces and times" is not the case here.It's not even about being flowery, just aimed at space and time and not the spaces and times of all universes. It can also be flowery anyway as that's what people do and this statement is a personal take given outside the game. And why the heck is "both" in bold there?
Its outright saying infinite. There's nothing poetic about it. Especially when used together with the rest of the given supporting evidence."as it's directly explaining the space-time relationship in the verse"
Doesn't make it less poetic than any poetic claim made to directly explain relationships and other things that matter a lot.
And see above too."speaking about the roles the god tiers have in the verse's cosmology"
As before.
"and is giving explicit context and information about the cosmology"
As before.
And see above too. Your point is from incredulity and has absolutely no reason to refer to the size of the worlds instead of the outright numbers of them, which I prove is what its referring to in my blog far more than your baseless alternate head canon."And the basis for this is from WoG, giving the T.C.G. statement and especially Lucian's statement (which is coming from Lore in Canalave Library and not something he just conjured up on the fly) a strong leg to stand on"
As before, and again, it has no reason to refer to all spaces in all universes and all times in all universes, but space and time, which end as the universe ends or at best don't end if they're really infinite, making a universe of that size, but not making infinite of them.
No, that's putting my actual point from the blog as a understatement.The text given below Masuda's quote saying why it has to refer to infinite universes "in this context" is another case where I find that that the logic used doesn't make sense, like saying a lot of random words and then finishing with "therefore the sky is red", the multiverse has a lot of universes and time and space are infinite therefore there are infinite universes?
It literally is information given to us.So time and space aren't infinite in size but infinite in amounts of them, and that's literally not the information given to us.
FaxAnd I've already explained how it being "just aimed at space and time and not the spaces and times" is not the case here.
Space is referring to the number of universes and the very being who represents it is known as the creator of parallel universes, which also refers to the number of universes. It being "just aimed" at the space and time of the worlds has no basis and makes no sense.
Its outright saying infinite. There's nothing poetic about it. Especially when used together with the rest of the given supporting evidence.
And see above too.
And see above too. Your point is from incredulity and has absolutely no reason to refer to the size of the worlds instead of the outright numbers of them, which I prove is what its referring to in my blog far more than your baseless alternate head canon.
No, that's putting my actual point from the blog as a understatement.
The point is that time and space, which is being cited as infinite, refers to the number of universes in the Multiverse. Not simply because the Multiverse has a vast amount of universes. And because they refer to number, and are cited as infinite, it brings us to infinite universes. Extremely simple.
And is given far more support than whatever baseless scenario you're trying to conjure up.
It literally is information given to us.
I also agree with the OP so put me there toAgreeing:
26 Non-staff: (Oleggator, Zencha9, GohanBlanko, The_Axiom_of_Virgo, Starsprite53, GlaceonGamez471, Asriel77, Lord_JJJ, Greenshifter, Greatlskander, Shmooply, ShadowWarrior, Planck69, Psychomaster35, Crimson_Shadow101, StrymULTRA, ShadowGamerOmega, Bobsican, Half_Shiny, TheQuirkyBoy, Rikimarox2, PlozAlcachaz, Sadistic_Sleuth, theultimate5105, deonment, Hasty12345)
2 Staff (DarkDragonmedus, KieranH10)
In total: 28 in favor.
You were counted.I also agree with the OP so put me there to
Oh I know that. We're definitely waiting. Im just keeping up with the total agreeing tally.Shouldn't the staff be prompted? We already have more than enough non-staff support. Now it's time for them to decide.
Didn't think anything will convince me of 2-A Pokemon.
I was wrong.
What's funny is that taking it to just mean a single universe is both 2-A via MWI and still upgrades all universe feats to High 3-A. Of course, the current stance is solid enough.Space = palkia and alternate universes, so an infinite amount of space is the same as calling palkia and the alternate universes infinite.
Same deal with dialga, so i agree.
If not, this would upgrade every universe related feat there into high 3-A (and give infinite speed if there is any feat like that)
So win-win
Many-Worlds Interpretation.What's MWI again?
Whats your takeaway on this?Wow, I remember when Arceus beat Bill Cipher when we had him at 2-A and I said Adventure Time was more powerful than Pokémon.
Now Arceus probably solos all of Western Animation.
It actually is, Space being Infinite is stated from also other sources, not just himYou should also be writing down who disagrees, imo.
Also, not sure why everyone rejected it being flowery language:
The relationship between all these Pokemon is the key element. I wanted to express the importance of the balance between substance — Dialga, the ruler of Time, and Palkia, the ruler of Space — and spirit — Uxie, Mesprit, Azelf. If the substance becomes too large, the balance of the spirit collapses. I wanted Dialga and Palkia to become counterparts for a sense of balance. Infinite time and infinite space — that to me is the ‘ultimate.'"
He is being pretty straightforward that he's talking about the idea of Dialga, Palkia, and the spirit trio; not their actual tiering or anything.
I didn't because the disagreeing arguments hardly have any reasoning or points to them, and the bits that are mentioned I already countered in the blog.You should also be writing down who disagrees, imo.
What you bolded out has absolutely nothing to do with the scale of what he's specifying time and space as being. Which is infinite.Also, not sure why everyone rejected it being flowery language:
The relationship between all these Pokemon is the key element. I wanted to express the importance of the balance between substance — Dialga, the ruler of Time, and Palkia, the ruler of Space — and spirit — Uxie, Mesprit, Azelf. If the substance becomes too large, the balance of the spirit collapses. I wanted Dialga and Palkia to become counterparts for a sense of balance. Infinite time and infinite space — that to me is the ‘ultimate.'"
He is being pretty straightforward that he's talking about the idea of Dialga, Palkia, and the spirit trio; not their actual tiering or anything.
^What you bolded out has absolutely nothing to do with the scale of what he's specifying time and space as being. Which is infinite.
Oh my god are you fr?Professor The scale of flowery language is still flowery language.
Strym That's not how flowery language works. Flowery language can be consistent with other aspects (it'd be weirder if it wasn't) but still be flowery.
Flowery language doesn't depend on the context of the verse, since it's not a vs debating term or the like. It's just a language trope, so you have to prove it's not flowery language from within the response itself.
Then its a good thing there's nothing flowery about it, and what you tried pointing out doesn't equate to that.Professor The scale of flowery language is still flowery language.
Strym That's not how flowery language works. Flowery language can be consistent with other aspects (it'd be weirder if it wasn't) but still be flowery.