Based on the proof, it say that ginnun is a space for traveling the multiverse, it also say it encompasses the parallel worlds/universes not encompassing the multiverse
No, the Ginnungagap is the space that encompasses the multiverse, like the irl universe encompasses all the planets
But the proof say it encompasses the parallel worlds not the multiverse
...The parallel works in the multiverse, yes. The Worlds of Chaos are an infinite number of parallel worlds that exist within the realm of Chaos
Yeah and the ginnun is the multiverse it self
Im not going to do a lot of arguing on if Ginnungagap encompasses the multiverse on this thread. It has already been accepted, and it says so in the entry. Read it.
What? Theres only one multiverse, which is the Worlds of Chaos within the realm of Chaos.
What in the actual Inferno are you talking about? It is physically, spiritually and scientifically impossible to come to that conclusion using the abundance of explanations and evidence provided.
So if it already accepted it cannot be false?
Yeah and that the ginnun, there are no proof ginnun encompasses multiverse but there are proof ginnun encompasses parallel worlds/universes and become space for travelling the multiverse
Bruh.. just answer what i say above, i literally just copy paste what the proof say
Because it’s already been accepted by such an overwhelming amount of people, your claim that “Ginnun isn’t 5D” based on the incorrect statement of “Ginnun is the multiverse” is false, yes.
Agreed, this is derailing at this point.
So you mean if it already accepted it cannot be false?? And I dont even say ginnun is not 5D, i just say ginnun is the multiverse
Isnt even dread above talking about it. And i not even say ginnun is 5D or not, i just say ginnun is the multiverse it self based on the proof
They were asked to stop talking about 5D because it’s derailing
Yeah so other people can talk about 5D and not getting ask for stop but i cannot, even if i not say anything about 5D in my statement
Bruh then why dont them asked dread for stop when she disagree with 5D ginnun???
Yeah i will stop, i'm just annoyed that as if I'm the only one to blame even if i dont mention about 5D in my statement
Theres nothing to apply, Milly got confused on the rating and it was explained, this isnt even a CRT
This is a crt, as this is under the crt option. And no, I didn’t get confused, and don’t try to convince me I am.
Asking for a clarification implies confusion in regards to one of the ratings. Your question was answered, ergo there is nothing to revise
I didn’t ask a question. I just said clarifications.
For ****'s sake Weekly, don't be wilfully obtuse, this just looks embarrassing.
And those clarifications were given
Not sure why people think im dishonest, i hate liars and do everything i can to make sure everythign i say is as factually correct as possible. And the thinly veiled threat is not appreciated and rather unnecessary.
What do you mean?
It’s not a threat; I’m just telling you, that’s my final response to you.
What is there even to report? Ive done literally nothing wrong here.
Staff members like yourself who commented before seeing any counter-arguments, have yet to reply to any of them after they were posted. I didn’t know we started to only agree on the premises of the OP, and then apply.
I've read the counter arguments. I've read the responses. The fact that up to this point I haven't posted about that just means that I still hold my initial stance.
You keep trying to twist this into nothing but a glorified QnA that's been answered. It isn't. Staff aren't agreeing with her asking for clarifications and no changes, that doesn’t make sense.
It is a glorified QnA that has been answered, yes. There is no change that has been proposed, theres nothing to agree to. Milly asked for the reasoning behind this and it was given. Why you areacting like this is a revision is beyond my comprehension.
Its very obvious that you have not read this when even the OP is in agreement with the counterargument.
Its not a CRT, theres no premise to hold onto
So can you re-explain why your stance has remained unchanged, after reading the arguments? I can’t imagine that your stance when presented with actual arguments is the same, and you have absolutely no questions at all?
You want me to explain why counter-arguments that I've decided don't hold up against the main premise.... don't hold up against the main premise? Like, look at my initial post I guess? This may come as a surprise to you but one can look at both sides and of an argument and just agree with another's stance on the matter.
They haven't though? And they've even clarified this to me when I asked directly.
My guy, in one post you have proven you didnt read any of the arguments. Singularity isnt Low 1-C because he scales to his EE, he is Low 1-C because he physically beat the shit out of people who are Low 1-C physically.
