Marvel Comics: Possible Yggdrasil Upgrade - Part 3

[Alonik]

Its not because in the context of Eternity appearing inside the Multiverse we are often dealing with M-Bodies.

Yggdrasil in the same way, since since the first discussion has already been talked about his avatars.

• Your agent intends violence to an ASPECT of the tree of yggdrasil.

And speaking of such, they are the perfect example of why we can't take literal claims like that as fact. Because the Dimension of Manifestations was stated to be outside all realities and beyond them, it has a white background and it's where abstract shit happen. So obviously it's the same thing as the Outside, and therefore M-Body eternity > Multi Eternity.

Just your personal theory/speculation. Because it's white doesn't mean it's the outside. And that's just unreliable, no concrete evidence to engage on.

 

[Alonik]

Moreover, in the same storyline that speaks of this, it also shows that the dimension of manifestations is below the microverse, only.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Said Aspect is in relation to a literal Tree-sized Tree. Not the giant World-sized tree that is almost always stated to contain Ten Universes and that's it.. Out of context stuff once again.

 

[Alonik]

It's not out of context, it's there literally saying it's a aspect of Yggdrasil, and what you said above is just Frandall's verbal expression manipulation, nothing more. Uncommitted with the verbal conjugation once again.

• That tree is an earthly iteratio of your ALL-TREE?

and for local ten worlds:

• Were the merest branch severed. unmoored wouldst the worlds and heavens be.

 

[Kepekley23]

That was after Loki shifted the scenery for his "set dressing" as he called it. The black first appeared as the background for his storytelling.

This is not true. Loki's statement about set dressing was specifically in reference to his stories about how the gods came to be. You can see that even when we leave the "set", the background is still black, and it arbitrarily shifts between white and black, to fit the TWSAIS' theme.

The color of the "void" is arbitrary and shifts depending on the artist. It isn't an in-universe thing.

The same story has Odin visit the Throne of the TWAIS in a "forgotten void outside all realms and outside all realities" and then chapters later has Loki come across the Throne of the TWSAIS...in the void outside all realities. Arguing that it's not the same realm would be so weird as to require direct evidence, and an inconsistent background color for the void really doesn't qualify as such evidence at all.

 

[Kepekley23]

It's also worth noting that the introduction for Issue 17 specifically debunks the notion that the TWSAIS reside in the multiverse, since it specifies that Loki and Verity were the only ones in the storyline to survive the collapse of the multiverse, and that they attracted the attention of the TWSAIS after they fled into the Outside, which also suggests it's their realm.

 

[Kepekley23]

Said Aspect is in relation to a literal Tree-sized Tree. Not the giant World-sized tree that is almost always stated to contain Ten Universes and that's it.. Out of context stuff once again.

Rune King Thor didn't get the memo, since he destroyed the World Tree yet it was not portrayed as some gigantic universe/planet-sized Tree, just a big tree that happened to be cosmic in scale regardless of its size.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

By the same definition as the context of the scan being presented it would imply it wasn't the "whole thing".

But no, I know it was the whole tree. Only that said tree only encompassed nine universes as far as Marvel Cosmology of the time was concerned.

 

[Alonik]

Wrong, in the same time yggdrasil encompass the whole variations of the primordial universe, which that means the multiverse, and that belies all this speculation of being "only 9 universes"

• There are many Lokis... Just as there are many Thors, and many balders. Each one exists apart from the other, yet is conjoined by a shared essence, like branches on a tree. In some incarnations, Loki is called Lock, in some, he is Loge, in still others, Lokes, or Loder.
• An army of lokis... A multitude of thors... from a seemingly infinite array of asgards!

persist in speaking Low 1-C, when the comics says that Yggdrasil has infinite universes in that storyline/time, are just empty words.

 

[ParadoxIndifferent]

Finally back home after a trip to the pizzeria. Now, let me address the elephant in the room.

One thing I'm glad with is that you have finally decided to get rid of the snark in your tone and the accusations against my honesty.

That said, your post still suffers from a major case of you misinterpreting the information I laid out, or at least not understanding what I meant while explaining each scan, as well as not connecting each scan to the overall bigger picture I was trying to portray in my post.

You, as well as pretty much everyone else arguing against the upgrade right now, are taking and approaching my arguments and the overall issue too unilaterally; too bound to the scans about the "The Outside" or "Ginnungagap", and that's why you failed to actually understand what I was trying to do in my post.

> This is the already familiar scan of Odin meeting the Shadow Sitting Gods "outside the realms, outside all realities". This is nothing knew, and in fact I have already accepted this to be the case: Namely, that they come from a realm outside the Marvel Multiverse. This is plainly stated a few times. My objection comes with this suddenly being evidence of the Shadow Sitting Gods being Outerversal... Which, quite honestly, isn't. Saying that they come from such a realm doesn't make them 1-A, even if the realm in itself was.

This is the premier example of what I am talking about. You're so attached to this counterargument that you completely missed what I was getting at - the point completely flew over your head and you failed to realize that I was not trying to use this scan to argue about the Outside and the TWSAIS being 1-A for inhabiting it, but merely setting the context for the rest of my argument concerning Ragnarok and the end of reality.

What was my actual point? Well, I detailed it pretty well in the original post, already. The TWSAIS summon Odin to the outside of the multiverse in his dreams, and Odin, confused, yells out that they can't possibly have returned, since they hold no power over creation without Ragnarok. The Shadows acknowledge this, but that's exactly why they have come back; because everything is about to end, and they'll assert themselves as the final victors after the destruction of all reality.

Why this is relevant? I've already detailed why that is, but let's keep reading to find out, since I apparently need to restate my point.

> This scan doesn't say much of anything, honestly. It's just Odin and other people talking about the end of all things and the coming of the Last Day

That's precisely the point of the sca, to set the context for the story. Odin angrily tells the Congress of the Worlds about his dream and the coming of the end, the congress tells him that they believe the events talked about in his dream are just the signs of an upcoming "Multiversal Cosmic Process". One of the first among many scans to indicate that the Story of the Last Day and the Ragnarok that the TWSAIS rule over were codenames for the events of multiversal scale throughout all stories, not just the Norse aspect of them.

> This... I'm not even sure why this scan is here? It's just Loki telling Verity that all stories have endings, in relation to the events of the storyline and the eventual collapse of the Marvel Multiverse. It tells us nothing relevant.

That's precisely what I'm getting at, Matthew. This scan is one infinitesimal part of the entire picture I was trying to drawn, namely to establish the idea that the stories have a beginning, middle, and end. See, this is why you should try to tackle the scans collectively and understand the bigger picture while you do so, as opposed to dissecting each of the scans that form the entire picture individually, and colossally missing the point as a result.

> The followup double-page scan is just reiterating that same idea. This is the Last Incursion of the Beyonders. The Last Day. The end of the Marvel Multiverse. The end of the story.

Indeed, you are correct at the core, for, as I said, the day of Last Battle is the day, the story where everything, everyone goes to battle, just before the omniverse and all its stories collapse. And as a story, it is not limited to the Norse Gods. It is connected to all entities throughout the multiverse. Everything is connected, as we will further see later.

> This page with Loki and Verity's spirit in the Outside isn't very helpful either, actually? He's talking about how, even with the destruction of the Marvel Multiverse, the story has yet to end.

Matthew, I never tried to use this scan to apply to the events of Ragnarok. I was just explaining to outsiders of the debate what the characters meant with the terms. Once again, this is why you should not tackle everything with an one-track mind. You'll end up missing the entire point.

> Once again, Loki is reiterating what happened and what he meant before. The Multiverse was completely wiped out by the Beyonders and the events of Secret Wars, but you can't wipe out stories. They survive, persist, change and evolve. This is all very plainly Meta, in how the stories of Marvel never truly end no matter the in-universe cataclysms that happen in them.

Half-right, half-wrong. It is both a wink to the audience, as I plainly explained in the post for everyone to see, and an actual mechanism of Al Ewing's cosmology. The stories are tales come to life, the universe believing lies and changing itself to accommodate. Loki himself explains the nature of the stories when challenging the TWSAIS: the gods, the heroes, all lives are stories told by the campfire, metaphorical or otherwise. In this case, the story of the Last Battle was a multiversal story, told through the angle of many lives, and we're seeing one such angle now.

> I'm... Not sure what this thread is accomplishing, either? Hela is saying that the warriors who die as the universe ends will either be sent to Valhalla, or to her own realm, but only briefly as all realms will be destroyed. Which Old Loki reiterates. But this is not particularly meaningful. People go to Valhalla, Helheim and other afterlives in Marvel all the time. I'm confused as to why that's here.

Which is exactly why you should have attempted to better understand what I was trying to get at with the collective scans, instead of reading this with the one-track mind of "Outside", "Ginnungagap", "Norse Gods" and reacting accordingly.

Regardless, I plainly explained what I was trying to get at, and highlighted it: Hela states that the story was about to die, taking everything with it, and this story includes the entire multiverse. This was yet another of the scans I was using to explain the nature of Al Ewing's "stories".

> Another scan that has appeared before already. Yes, the Issue Recap that states that the Marvel Multiverse is ending. We've been through this already. It's not a feat for anything other than those responsible for its destruction. And let me cut some times, because this other Issue Recap that states that the multiverse was destroyed and now Loki will try to prevent the Stories of the Gods from being consumed by the Shadow Sitting Gods isn't much of anything, either.

As I have explained multiple times, the Stories of Last Battle encompassed the end of the entire omniverse, and those stories were what the TWSAIS were naturally going to consume, only for the multiverse to be reborn and so on. They didn't destroy the multiverse, but that doesn't matter, because they were going to do something just as good, if not eve better.

> I have yet to understand why eating "a story" is significant, overall, when it's evident from the scans presented that Stories are treated as metaphorical, intangible ideas, and not literal power sources that can be quantified into Tiers.

This is, of course, blatantly false. Loki literally holds a story in his hand after the multiverse collapses. They are metaphors that give birth to very much physical, solid facts of reality. This is explained in such clear words in the comic that I find myself surprised you can still say something of the sort.

• Imagine...those oldest tales! Echoing! Through the air, the mind! Through space and time! Back to the start of all things! Mixing with the all that was to sparkle something new!

• In their ears, they heard the magic words of the Skald -- spells passed down from teller to teller, to conjure the gods themselves, to make them dance and play in the mind and heart.

And they are very real power-sources, as the TWSAIS themselves explain:

• "The end has come, small god. All is gone...all but the stories. The stories we feed on. That we have ever fed on, in Ragnarok, after Ragnarok. . . . As long as they war at the end of everything, we will be the final victors."

• You hold what we require. The legends and lives of the Gods, their lifeforces.

So yes, stories are very much physical sources of power. They're just created by metaphors.

> Likewise, these scans about the Norse Gods fighting the Last Battle isn't much strong evidence of anything, either. Whatsoever. I suppose you're attempting to say that the events of Time Runs Out / Secret Wars were literally Ragnarok to them, but that's clearly not what's happening. The gods here are battling for completely different reasons than they did in Ragnarok proper

The reason why they're battling is completely irrelevant to the scale of the storyline and to the "Ragnarok" story. It's still Ragnarok. It's still the end and the last day of the cosmos, as explicitly noted in the storyline and as I have pointed out through numerous scans explicitly using the idea of "Ragnarok" to refer to the concept of multiversal destruction. The TWSAIS themselves, alongside multiple other sources, said so.

• Without Ragnarok, you can not exist! ... Aye. But now there is a new Ragnarok. Now the stars end, and we retur.

• Loki sat out the final battle of the New Ragnarok...

So yes, the collapse of the omniverse that happened after that battle was encapsulated under the label of "Ragnarok" and the Story of the Last Days and Battle.

> and they do admit that the scale of the Last Day is far beyond anything they can do.

1. In what sense? As I have already detailed, the story of Ragnarok and the last battle were multiversal in scale. So much so that Hela's actions were delaying the destruction of all existence, all the omniverse:

• Hela: "A simple equation, god of tales. If Midgard dies, all that is will live to see another day."

• Odin: "Would it were so, but...the multiverse has grown small and weak. Whatever happens now, the flame of being can only flicker and die."

2. I mentioned that word-for-word,, and it, if anything, just supports my point of view even further, considering the fact that Loki's theory is that the TWSAIS are shaped from the fears and stories of the God, specifically concerning the "death of everything". If the Gods' fears revolve around their inability to stop the destruction of the omniverse, which they do, and their stories about the New Ragnarok revolved around the end of the entire multiverse, which it did...then it's just natural that the TWSAIS end up being multiversal in scale, and that's what the story itself reflects, as I have proven with my scans.

> It would certainly be very weird if the literal Ragnarok, an event centered around the Earth-616 versions of the Norse Gods, had repercussions throughout all levels and realms of the Marvel Multiverse, right?

But it does have repercussions throughout the entire Marvel Multiverse, my young Padawan. Hell, forget the Gods and Ragnarok: in Al Ewing's cosmology, even the story of a normal human lady had repercussions on the fate of the Marvel Multiverse!

• The - the world is ending! My life story's not important right now . . . Oh, you reckon? Because I think it might be the most important thing there is.

> Speaking of Metaphors... What a funny coincidence, the story itself shows that when Stories die, they are sent to a "Metaphorical Space". The Void which stories go to when they die isn't a literal physical dimensionless void, but a metaphorical one. Note the usage of the term "Ego Death" in the scan there, which refers to a concept of Jungian Psychology meaning the "complete loss of subjective self-identity". Basically, your story is who you are on a subjective, perceptive level. It is your sense of self and conscience. Not anything that can be quantified.

This is completely wrong.

• You fell to the void - just like last time...that which is called ego-death. The absence of self. Becoming not. Leaving behind attachment . . . But then...when all that was gone... I came back.

When one suffers from ego-death in Al Ewing's cosmology, they still exist, their story is still not over. When their story is truly over, it ceases to exist. Simple as that. I've posted the scans for this.

And I have proven stories are pretty quantifiable.

> And this finally brings up to Loki's meeting with the Shadow Sitting Gods. Namely, that they confirm that all of existence is destroyed, and that now nothing remains but the stories. The stories which they'll feed on, which are namely the stories of the Norse Gods. They are not seeking to feed on the story of everything that ever happened in the War of Last Day / the events of Secret Wars, but merely the Norse Gods' part in that event.

They were seeking to consume the story of Ragnarok; the story of the end of the entire multiverse in this run, as I have proven with my scans. When Loki saved a tiny slice of it, they went after him to claim it for themselves.

> They are not consuming the literal, physical multiverse, nor even the story of the whole multiverse's ending. But the story of the gods. That's it.

They are indeed not consuming the literal multiverse. They're consuming the very story that leads to the multiverse's destruction to begin with, which is at least an equal feat and, in my view, even more impressive, considering the conceptual shenanigans that I have elaborated upon.

> Amusingly, when Loki narrates the stories of the Gods to dispute Those Who Sit In Shadows, his narrative is not only uncertain ("Maybe that's just nonsense), but also quite limited.

I have already talked about Loki's narrative not being factual, but possibility. In fact, as I explained, no matter which side of the story you decide to take as fact, be it Loki's or the TWSAIS', both of them lead to the TWSAIS being multiversal deities.

> He references the Ten Realms birthing from Ginnungagap, with these Ten Realms being the Ten Spheres held by the World Tree Yggdrasil. It's amazing that in this very story Yggdrasil is being treated as limited to the 10 realms alone.

I could dispute this, but it doesn't really matter for this specific post, so okay, sure.

> Also, the Gods being born out of the stories mortal spin from them is all fine and dandy, except for when it is an idea that's blatantly contradicted by other writers and their own interpretations. Certainly, it is what Al Ewing is going for, but not everyone accepts it.

It doesn't matter if other writers have other interpretations. We're discussing characters who have made a very limited amount of appearances in the history of Marvel Comics, and their two major appearances (The Thor 1998 story and Al Ewing's Loki story) both abide by this cosmology, so what other writers who have no bearing on the TWSAIS think is irrelevant.

> And this scene also perfectly illustrates the metaphorical power of stories. Much like mortals spin the tales of the Gods, the Gods themselves spin the tales of the Gods of Gods. And since Loki is now the God of Stories, and the only storyteller remaining, he holds power over Those Who Sit In Shadow through the act of telling their stories.

1. Indeed, the Gods of the Gods might have spun the tale of the Shadow Gods. But if you choose to believe Loki, then you're saying that he is indeed correct when he states that the TWSAIS are shaped from the Gods' interpretations of "everything dying", and their fears and inability to control the situation, which would be a concession that they're multiversal, since, as I detailed above, Ragnarok/the Norse Gods' "Death of Everything" in this story was intertwined with the end of the Omniverse as an event.

2. And lastly, no, he doesn't have any power over them. Literally the next page. He was just bluffing and confidently telling a load of hogwash that may or may have not been true. He held no real power over them, he was just so good of a storyteller that they believed his bluff and fled in fear of the possibility that they were created by the very beings they transcended!

> Loki's triumph over them isn't evidence that he has 1-A Power. It's a testament to his cleverness and wit, and the symbolical power stories hold over us.

No one ever talked about 1-A Loki, so...okay.

> As an addendum, the notion that it was the Norse Gods themselves who created Those Who Sit In Shadow is ironic in itself, because it perfectly undermines their own statement of being the creators of the whole Cycle. Look to the two scans above.

No, it doesn't undermine anything, because Loki's theory is that the Norse Gods created the TWSAIS in order to fit the role of cosmic gods who transcended them and created their cycle, to begin with. Which means it's a contradiction that feeds itself, as Kep has explained.

In the original 1998 Thor storyline, you can clearly see that the TWSAIS did create the Grand Cycle, since they were the ones to give the Norns the power to maintain it:

• No! No! It's not fair! They gave this power to us - to us! Don't take it away!

> This here establishes that Loki and Verity were "Outside" all existence when he met the Gods of Gods. Which I've never disputed. They are indeed Outside the Marvel Multiverse. But that is utterly meaningless for tiering anyone, in fact.

Which still makes your original claim that Ginnungagap was not a 1-A void incorrect, as I have detailed countless times.

> This scan which tells the Norse Creation Myth is itself extremely limited, because it only talks about the emergence of the Ten Realms from the yawning void of Ginnungagap. Nothing more than Ten Realms held by one World Tree (Not a multiversal world tree, eh?).

It does not matter how many realms emerged from Ginnungagap. You claimed it wasn't the void before all creation, and you were shown to be wrong. Regardless, as I have shown, it's the Norse interpretation of the primordial void, so of course the narration is going to focus on the Norse realms. That still doesn't do anything to undermine the scans that prove it is the same void as the Outside.

> This scan is exactly the same thing, with the sole difference being that it references Nine Worlds instead of Ten. To make a long story short, the very scans that were brought up to defend the position that Ginnungagap is a "OuTerVeRSaL vOiD" contradict said claim. Wew

As I have shown, they don't.

> A long and impressively-looking post is often seldom reliable when analyzed with the slightest scrutiny

I perfectly agree with your sentiment here.

 

[Kepekley23]

Thank you for helping out.

 

[PhantomMistress]

The "Gods of the Gods" sound like they are definitely at the very, very, very least "At least Low 1-A" from what Paradox has established here, and most likely 1-A via being relative to the void beyond all dimensionality.

 

[C2_of_Omegon]

Just to put in my own two cents on the matter: I firmly am against the upgrade for much the same reason as PrinceOfTheMorning.

 

[Kepekley23]

The "Gods of the Gods" sound like they are definitely at the very, very, very least "At least Low 1-A" from what Paradox has established here, and most likely 1-A via being relative to the void beyond all dimensionality.

Agreed.

The upgrade makes more and more sense as this thread passes, IMO.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Wrong, in the same time yggdrasil encompass the whole variations of the primordial universe, which that means the multiverse, and that belies all this speculation of being "only 9 universes"

• There are many Lokis... Just as there are many Thors, and many balders. Each one exists apart from the other, yet is conjoined by a shared essence, like branches on a tree. In some incarnations, Loki is called Lock, in some, he is Loge, in still others, Lokes, or Loder.
• An army of lokis... A multitude of thors... from a seemingly infinite array of asgards!

persist in speaking Low 1-C, when the comics says that Yggdrasil has infinite universes in that storyline/time, are just empty words.

What's this supposed to mean. Nowhere in either instance are they talking about Yggdrasil. You're just taking the "brances on a tree" metaphor literally to try, once again, to see a connection where there is none.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

The "Gods of the Gods" sound like they are definitely at the very, very, very least "At least Low 1-A" from what Paradox has established here, and most likely 1-A via being relative to the void beyond all dimensionality.

I will once again reply to his post later but I am still not seeing anything to warrant a tier. When I said "Low 1-C" I was being generous, not that I agree with that either. I mainly think that they are just completely and utterly featless.

But I can already say that his post suffers from much the same systemic problems as all his others, such as a severe missusage of correlation =/= causation, starting from conclusions and then merely interpreting things in ways that align to those conclusions, and once again the issue with Ginnungagap and the Outside remains unproven and circular.

Of course the "Gods of Gods" will sound impressive when you just read a long post without context.

 

[Kepekley23]

They are obviously talking about Yggdrasil in the first scan.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

They are obviously talking about Yggdrasil in the first scan.

Prove it.

I care not for what you think is "obvious", but for what is factual.

 

[Kepekley23]

But I can already say that his post suffers from much the same systemic problems as all his others, such as a severe missusage of correlation =/= causation, starting from conclusions and then merely interpreting things in ways that align to those conclusions, and once again the issue with Ginnungagap and the Outside remains unproven and circular.

Of course the "Gods of Gods" will sound impressive when you just read a long post without context.

His post has far more context than anything else in this thread, straight up. He dissected the story scan by scan and connected it to everything else.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

That's not context, that's conjecture. It's seeing a river in a glass of water. It is taking a single incidental line of dialogue said in passing by one character and building a world out of it. That is not the foundation on which strong, self-sustaining upgrades are formed.

And when I look at the provided scans I see none of his interpretations. Are you to say that whosoever disagrees with his subjective interpretation of limited information in various unrelated scans is objectively wrong? Because that's not only illogical, but arrogant.

Thirdly. It doesn't matter if you think the post has more context or not. Comments like "Yeah, the upgrade seems more logical by the minute guys!" are nothing but attempts to build measely morale to stir the thread in one direction or another. They are not arguments.

 

[Kepekley23]

• "There are many Lokis... Just as there are many Thors, and many balders. Each one exists apart from the other, yet is conjoined by a shared essence, like branches on a tree."

The essence that joins them are the branches "on a tree". Which tree is this? Maybe the tree shown in the exact same storyline, exact same chapter even (Loki 2004)

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

The essence that joins them are the branches "on a tree". Which tree is this? Maybe the tree shown in the exact same storyline (Loki 2004)

No tree. It's a metaphor, my dude. I know you are Brazilian, same as myself, and thus I understand that English is not your first language, but surely you understand the concept of metaphors and linguistical expressions, correct? "Like branches on a tree" is a very common metaphor in the English language, and Loki using it to describe the alternate versions of himself s branches is perfectly normal.

Like most other issues in this thread, complications have arisen from an overly literalistic interpretation of every single scan. In this case, one from a storyline 10 years before Secret Wars by another author which is completely unrelated to the themes and ideas of the later.

I mean, even in this post you immediately start from the assumption that there is a literal tree, while ignoring the "like" that comes before the explanation which indicates its not literal. That's not how literary analysis works.

 

[Kepekley23]

> That's not context, that's conjecture. It's seeing a river in a glass of water. It is taking a single incidental line of dialogue said in passing by one character and building a world out of it. That is not the foundation on which strong, self-sustaining upgrades are formed.

You don't get the right to decide what qualifies as "conjecture" or not. He has provided scans at every turn, for every single question asked in the thread, and provided the entire context of the story. You can remain unconvinced, but that doesn't change everyone else who is convinced by his argument.

> And when I look at the provided scans I see none of his interpretations. Are you to say that whosoever disagrees with his subjective interpretation of limited information in various unrelated scans is objectively wrong?

Uh, kinda, yes. Not objectively wrong, but simply wrong until they actually get the scans to debate as opposed to throwing in guesswork.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

You are now inverting the burden of proof. It is obviously conjecture from your part without factual evidence. With you pushing said conjecture as fact and acting like it is undeniable, irrefutable proof. Likewise, you don't get to erase the existence of every single person who disagrees by strawmaning them into uninformed simpletons.

You know why? Because I looked through the 2004 Loki Miniseries just now and the word "Yggdrasil" isn't even mentioned once in all four issues. Not once. So yes, I am more convinced than ever that it is only a metaphor and not a literal reference to the tree, if basic understanding of the English language hand't made it obvious already.

And I find it ironic that you say that everyone who is refuting his scans with analysis of their content is throwing "guesswork" when a big portion of this upgrade attempt is just throwing stuff at the walls with a lack of care for sources.

 

[Kepekley23]

> No tree. It's a metaphor, my dude. I know you are Brazilian, same as myself, and thus I understand that English is not your first language, but surely you understand the concept of metaphors and linguistical expressions, correct?

Lived a good one fourth of my life on Canada, yes. I have more than enough of a grasp on the English language to tell metaphor from analogy.

> Like branches on a tree" is a very common metaphor in the English language, and Loki using it to describe the alternate versions of himself s branches is perfectly normal.

Except it's blatantly not.

• "There are many Lokis... Just as there are many Thors, and many balders. Each one exists apart from the other, yet is conjoined by a shared essence, like branches on a tree."

As opposed to a metaphor about your family being connected to the same roots, Loki is literally talking about all the versions of himself and the Asgardians across the multiverse being connected by a literal essence, and he then explains that those are branches on a tree. The "like" here isn't being used to evoke a metaphor, but rather a way of answering what the shared essence in question was.

Take the following conversation, for example:

• "I have many other things to do with my time, like playing football!"

The person here is not using "like" metaphorically, but rather to provide the answer to their own earlier affirmation that they had "many things to do with their time".

This analogy is shown to be 100% literal literally moments later. Loki in this scan is surprised because he has never seen an iteration where he is the ruler, and wants to see it for himself, and then in the introduction of the very next chapter:

• "Behold, lord Loki, you would see whether there exist others akin to you beyond this plane you now rule..."

And guess what happens? He goes to a representation of the Yggdrasil, where several versions of Thor and himself were strung out among "infinite Asgards":

"An army of Lokis and Thors, from a seemingly infinite array of Asgards!"

So the branches here? They are completely literal, and straight up confirmed as such in this story, unless you're going to pretend that Loki was hallucinating.

 

[Kepekley23]

> You are now inverting the burden of proof. It is obviously conjecture from your part without factual evidence. With you pushing said conjecture as fact and acting like it is undeniable, irrefutable proof. Likewise, you don't get to erase the existence of every single person who disagrees by strawmaning them into uninformed simpletons.

Never pretended anyone who disagrees with Paradox is uninformed. Te only one throwing in a good ol' package of strawman to make other people look like idiots here is you by twisting my words.

> And I find it ironic that you say that everyone who is refuting his scans with analysis of their content is throwing "guesswork" when a big portion of this upgrade attempt is just throwing stuff at the walls with a lack of care for sources.

Ironically, the only person in this thread who hasn't posted a single scan to back up their post is you. PrinceoftheMorning and some others who disagree have at least tried to back up their points with scans. Almost every word in Paradox's post is substantiated with a link.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

There are no literal branches. He used the word branch as a metaphor but as always confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. Specially when you bold one phrase that has nothing to do with the core of the metaphor. I never denied the story dealing with alternate timelines, only that the terminology "branch" was a metaphor. But as usual you strawmaned my argument there to make it seem like I was pretending that Loki was hallucinating and nothing about universes was brought up.

And the fact that Yggdrasil is never once mentioned in the story makes your interpretation null and void. Certainly a random miniseries from 2004 that has no connection to the actual Al Ewing stories that make up the bulk of the discussion here is the hill you wanna die on.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

And don't try to make this about me, Kep. You have twisted the burden of proof with this literalist interpretation of a metaphor. And there is no need to poison the well by trying to mock me either. I have posted scans and I have analyzed scans, but you frame me as this guy who brings no argument and is just ignoring everything you say, which of course is irrefutable.

Seems to me like Bad Faith Debating honestly.

Also, quantity =/= quality. Throwing a huge tidalwave of unrelated scans at you may seem like it makes your argument stronger, but it really doesn't. Specially when one takes the time to dig through the trenches and look at what the scans actually say. Which, from my experience in these threads, is much ado about nothing.

 

[Kepekley23]

> There are no literal branches. He used the word branch as a metaphor but as always confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. Specially when you bold one phrase that has nothing to do with the core of the metaphor.

The core of his statement is literally the idea that each version of Loki/Thor/Baldr across the dimensions is linked by a shared essence, but somehow the part that I bolded has nothing to do with what he was trying to say? What are you even on about at this point?

> And the fact that Yggdrasil is never once mentioned in the story makes your interpretation null and void

It's good that it is literally shown on-screen instead of mentioned, and that the idea of "infinite Asgards across the tree" is straight up stated, then.

> Certainly a random miniseries from 2004 that has no connection to the actual Al Ewing stories that make up the bulk of the discussion here is the hill you wanna die on.

No, I don't really care about the story, actually. I'm just refuting your interpretation of it. If you agree that this story portrayed Yggdrasil as multiversal, then my work here is done, regardless of whether it applies to the discussion or not.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

It's not literally shown on-screen. We see different Lokis from parallel universes on-panel, but that has nothing to do with Yggdrasil because the story never once brought the World Tree up.

If you think that the story is literally talking about Yggdrasil when it brings up the parallel universes simply because Loki used a common linguistic expression, then I have nothing else to say it. I merely pity the confirmation bias.

 

[ParadoxIndifferent]

> Thirdly. It doesn't matter if you think the post has more context or not. Comments like "Yeah, the upgrade seems more logical by the minute guys!" are nothing but attempts to build measely morale to stir the thread in one direction or another. They are not arguments.

Unless they're backing up your side, apparently. In which case, you Kudos and say stuff like "always here to help, chief" and the likes. Is this only bad if it's the other side doing it, Matt?

I actually enjoyed the brief period where this went back to rational discussion as opposed to nonsensical dismissal and GOTCHAing, so I'd much rather that you stopped. Thanks.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Can we please stop with the hostility?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Stop with the personal accusations and the aggressive, confrontational tone.Salting the earth will add nothing to the fruits you will reap.

Secondly, my comment referred to things like people who already commented and are already engaged in the discussion just piggybacking each other's comments. Not someone who just came here to say "I agree with Side A".

 

[Kepekley23]

> It's not literally shown on-screen. We see different Lokis from parallel universes on-panel, but that has nothing to do with Yggdrasil because the story never once brought the World Tree up.

It has nothing to do with Yggdrasil, even though Yggdrasil appears on-screen, directly relating to what Loki said about never seeing a version of himself that acted as the King in the same statement we're discussing? Are you going to keep ignoring this?

> If you think that the story is literally talking about Yggdrasil when it brings up the parallel universes simply because Loki used a common linguistic expression, then I have nothing else to say it. I merely pity the confirmation bias.

You're the one ignoring the fact that the tree appears, and under a context directly related to his statement, so indeed.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

"It has nothing to do with Yggdrasil, even though Yggdrasil appears on-screen, directly relating to what Loki said about never seeing a version of himself that acted as the King in the same statement we're discussing? Are you going to keep ignoring this?"

Yes. It has nothing to do with Yggdrasil because it was never mentionde in the storyline nor did it ever appear in the storyline. You are centering your entire argument on half a line of dialogue uttered in one panel in what is clearly a metaphor to explain parallel universes.

"You're the one ignoring the fact that the tree appears, and under a context directly related to his statement, so indeed."

It didn't. Telling a lie many times over won't make it true.

 

[Kepekley23]

> Yes. It has nothing to do with Yggdrasil because it was never mentionde in the storyline nor did it ever appear in the storyline. You are centering your entire argument on half a line of dialogue uttered in one panel in what is clearly a metaphor to explain parallel universes.

It did appear in the storyline, under a context directly related to Loki's statement that you're so willing to handwave as a metaphor despite it clearly not being a metaphor.

> It didn't. Telling a lie many times over won't make it true.

Ignoring a scan many times over won't make it go away.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Jesus Christ, Kep. This is not Yggdrasil, this is just a visual representation of the fate of the many Lokis throughout the universes. I thought that the literalism was only reserved to textual instances but it extends to visuals as well.

That's not Yggdrasil, stop making stuff up. You're just inventing things that don't exist now.

 

[Kepekley23]

> Jesus Christ, Kep. This is not Yggdrasil, this is just a visual representation of the fate of the many Lokis throughout the universes. I thought that the literalism was only reserved to textual instances but it extends to visuals as well.

What "cosmic tree"exists in the Norse Realms that connects multiple versions of Loki and Thor together across more than every realm if not the World Tree? Are you really going to keep being such an willful contrarian?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

"What "cosmic tree"exists in the Norse Realms that connects multiple versions of Loki and Thor together across more than every realm if not the World Tree"

None because the World Tree only encompasses the Nine Realms / Ten Realms of Norse Mythology and not infinite universes.

That also doesn't address my point in the slightest, stop moving the goalpost. The tree made of Lokis in that page is a visual metaphor not a literal depiction.

 

[Kepekley23]

> None because the World Tree only encompasses the Nine Realms / Ten Realms of Norse Mythology and infinite universes.

So if you concede that the Tree encompasses infinite universes, why are you being such a contrarian to a scan that is being used to prove...just that?