Low 1-A Ninjago's Cosmology

[Lloydblitzed]

Sureeeeeeeeee... You totally didn't ask those questions for PWS purpose. Nah, it's probably just, genuine questions about the lore of the show, yeah, that must be it.

Time flows differently between Realms meta was established by the author himself, and we saw people from the Nether Space not aging at all. Care to explain why asking if Time works differently bc of that bad?

 

[SweetDao]

Time flows differently between Realms meta was established by the author himself, and we saw people from the Nether Space not aging at all. Care to explain why asking if Time works differently bc of that bad?

So yeah, you're not answering. You said "the show is enough" or "but we can use stuff if it's substantiated in the show itself" yet you're adamant on using that question. I feel like it's not even useful and in fact detrimental to use something as flimsy as WoG if the stuff is already substantiated enough in the raw material.

I think you're just not seeing things as they are. Ask yourself why did you ask in the first place such a question.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

So yeah, you're not answering. You said "the show is enough" or "but we can use stuff if it's substantiated in the show itself" yet you're adamant on using that question. I feel like it's not even useful and in fact detrimental to use something as flimsy as WoG if the stuff is already substantiated enough in the raw material.

I think you're just not seeing things as they are. Ask yourself why did you ask in the first place such a question.

WoG supporting and clarifying show statements is not against the rules. Yet again ignoring what I said.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

I say nuke this verse. Easiest solution.

We don't use any of Talos yappery in the cosmo page. Don't see why we should nuke the verse

 

[VeryGoofyToddler2]

We don't use any of Talos yappery in the cosmo page. Don't see why we should nuke the verse

It definitely wasn't a joke.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Are you a goofball? Let me picture it for you very simply.

Everything here, including the answer, can't be used. If you're saying that "but it's already explained in the show so we don't need to use it!" then just use the show.

I don’t see why the answer can’t be used though. It’s not “is X true?” “yes”. The answer does not answer the question at all. Hence why it can’t be treated as average leading statement cuz it’s not really affected by the question that was leading. It’s kinda if it was a post on its own, you know.

Anyways this is really semantics cuz the OP was about BDE Type 2 and Low 1-A/1-A stuff, and this scan does not really relate to it. And what I was proposing is to use it as supportive to the already established evidence in the series.

Quite frankly, I say close the thread and just forget about it.

 

[SweetDao]

I don’t see why the answer can’t be used though. It’s not “is X true?” “yes”. The answer does not answer the question at all. Hence why it can’t be treated as average leading statement cuz it’s not really affected by the question that was leading. It’s kinda if it was a post on its own, you know.

I disagree with this, but whatever, I'm no staff members, so if some come (in another thread) and explain it's fine, so be it. I wouldn't accept it, personally but let's not continue this useless endeavor.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Quite frankly, I say close the thread and just forget about it.

Tempted, but will wait for OP to confirm they want the thread closed.

 

[Overlord_Darkness]

Tempted, but will wait for OP to confirm they want the thread closed.

As main argument (Q1) seems to be not legit, thread has no support evidence for Low 1-A. It can be closed

 

[Reiner04]

Closing.