It's not fake. Anos says it created the illusion that time had stopped. This doesn't mean it's fake as even infinite speed characters don't actually stop time when they move.
Anos goes on to say "in a world where everything was frozen, only balzarondo was moving", "no the man was just to fast".
It's clearly referring to the illusion that time had stopped as an effect of balzorondo's speed.
Which is infinite speed. Moving so fast that time literally stops is considered infinite speed, always has and always will be.
Once again from balzarondo; my sword is the fatest. The balzarondo sword style that cuts through time.
His sword style is the fastest, because of that sword style he is able to cut through time. The 1st statement is reinforcing the 2nd one. You're basically stonewalling at this point.
Have you considered that his statement might be bullshit? It's not uncommon for characters to make inflated claims of what they're capable of, after all.
What Balzarondo claims is, according to you, immeasurable. However,
the absolute highest feat he has shown with his supposedly "immeasurable" speed is infinite. We don't accept character statements if the feats performed don't actually support the ratings claims, so unless you can show me an actual immeasurable feat, Balzarondo's own claims hold very little meaning.
As an example of this. if a character says they can move faster than light, and then performs a speed feat that's supersonic at best, we wouldn't take their statement all that seriously. This works in the inverse too, where many characters claim to not be able to move faster than light, then proceed to do so without issue. Feats will always take precedent over statements, and the only feat you've shown me qualifies for infinite speed.
TL;DR: You can't claim Balzarondo's sword style is immeasurable when the highest feat shown by it is infinite.
I would ask you not to generalize all of us under one group like, especially in this case where your rebuttal is what is actually lacking evidence. You can have different interpretations but not go the point you try to completely turn around what is right in front of you.
Not saying you didn't read the OP but you're stonewalling at this point
Thanks for proving my point lmao
I went through this exact shit in the plothax thread. Not saying it's universal, but it seems like a lot of MG fans can't handle any proper criticism of their CRTs, and just default to "nitpicking + didn't read the OP + stonewalling" as a defense mechanism.