Venuzdonoa Downgrade (Improved Argument)

[EldemadeDityjon]

Still waiting for those scans on the OP. Someone wake me up when the scans are provided.

Pretty sure there was a discussion rule for Venozdonor AP scaling to Silver Sea. Let me check. OP should make a seperate thread & get atleast 3 staff approve to remove that.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

1. Either you believe that the Silver Sea is a creation (which means that its an extension of the statement that Venuzdonoa can destroy all of creation, and therefore can destroy the Silver Sea) or you don't believe it (which means that the statement about Venuzdonoa being able to destroy all of creation doesn't apply to the Silver Sea regardless, and as such, there's no proof that it can destroy the Silver Sea).

2. I don't need scans to disprove headcanon. It isn't stated anywhere in the story that the Silver Sea is made up of Fire Dew.

3. Again, I don't need scans to disprove headcanon. We know for a fact that all Worlds in MGnF were created by Gods of Creation. However, never once has the Silver Sea been stated or implied to be a creation. If nothing in the story itself suggests that the Silver Sea is a creation, why do I need to prove it to you? There's nothing to prove to begin with.

4. Venuzdonoa destroying Graham who is "beyond reason and logic" isn't nearly enough to prove that it can destroy the Silver Sea. On top of that, Graham's nothingness existed beyond the nothingness that Venuzdonoa destroyed, so Venuzdonoa didn't even truly destroy Graham. If Venuzdonoa is some omnipotent weapon that can literally do anything, it would've completely destroyed even the nothingness that existed beyond what was destroyed. Furthermore, compared to some of the deeper world characters, Graham is fodder, so comparing him to the entire Silver Sea is utterly ridiculous.

5. None of the points you brought up have any solid grounds. You talk about Venuzdonoa being capable of destroying the entire Silver Sea as if it's a fact, but every point you make is utterly shaky at best. If you don't at least have a strong argument for why Venuzdonoa is capable of destroying the Silver Sea, then it shouldn't be treated as an undeniable fact.

Not gonna entertain you until you drop the scans and prove Venozdonor not being able to destroy something in the verse. Also Why don't you Link the Previous Thread which you claimed in the OP that these arguments are not brought up previously. Burden falls on you.

I was pretty sure Null made a discussion rule for Silver Sea and Venozdonor. I will wait for @Dereck03 to confirm it.

 

[RM97]

Who made the claim about Silver Sea being a creation ?

To whoever OP's points are directed towards. I am specifically addressing Reiner's comment on why it will not be on OP's part to fulfill the burden since he did not claim anything positive, but simply dismissing the assertive claim that he says has no evidence (Unless said evidence is already there).

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

The hell you smoking bro?
You just joined VSBW and this is the first shit you created?

. I don't need scans to disprove headcanon. It isn't stated anywhere in the story that the Silver Sea is made up of Fire Dew.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

Still waiting for those scans on the OP. Someone wake me up when the scans are provided.

You say that, but I would only need scans if there were scans that didn't align with what I'm claiming. There are no scans anywhere on the VsB Wiki that state that the Silver Sea is a creation, so I don't need scans to refute that idea.

 

[Tarang123]

You say that, but I would only need scans if there were scans that didn't align with what I'm claiming. There are no scans anywhere on the VsB Wiki that state that the Silver Sea is a creation, so I don't need scans to refute that idea.

That's not how that works. You need to show actual proof when you claim something. You can't simply make random claims and then try arguing that evidence isn't necessary just because there may not be any contention lol. This is just common sense. If you make a claim, you have to prove it. You've made claims, so prove them.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

The hell you smoking bro?
You just joined VSBW and this is the first shit you created?

There are no scans that state that the Silver Sea is a creation to begin with.

 

[RitsuØ1]

You say that, but I would only need scans if there were scans that didn't align with what I'm claiming. There are no scans anywhere on the VsB Wiki that state that the Silver Sea is a creation, so I don't need scans to refute that idea.

That's not how that works. You need to show actual proof when you claim something. You can't simply make random claims and then try arguing that evidence isn't necessary just because there may not be any contention lol. This is just common sense. If you make a claim, you have to prove it. You've made claims, so prove them.

^ Bro. Literally this.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

To whoever OP's points are directed towards. I am specifically addressing Reiner's comment on why it will not be on OP's part to fulfill the burden since he did not claim anything positive, but simply dismissing the assertive claim that he says has no evidence (Unless said evidence is already there).

He claimed Silver Sea is not a Creation. Which is his point with zero scans

 

[MaxLevel_King]

That's not how that works. You need to show actual proof when you claim something. You can't simply make random claims and then try arguing that evidence isn't necessary just because there may not be any contention lol. This is just common sense. If you make a claim, you have to prove it. You've made claims, so prove them.

You've summed it up perfectly. Proof is needed in order to make a claim. VsB claims that Venuzdonoa can destroy the Silver Sea, but there is no proof behind that claim. I'm not claiming that Venuzdonoa can't destroy the Silver Sea, but that there's no proof that it can. If there's no proof that it can, then it shouldn't be used as a fact.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

You've summed it up perfectly. Proof is needed in order to make a claim. VsB claims that Venuzdonoa can destroy the Silver Sea, but there is no proof behind that claim. I'm not claiming that Venuzdonoa can't destroy the Silver Sea, but that there's no proof that it can. If there's no proof that it can, then it shouldn't be used as a fact.

Still waiting for your scans & link for previous thread where your points weren't addressed.

 

[RM97]

He claimed Silver Sea is not a Creation. Which is his point with zero scans

But he also said this just above:

There are no scans that state that the Silver Sea is a creation to begin with.

Ultimately it boils down to whether Silver Sea is a Creation/Part of creation. If there is evidence or implication that Silver Sea is indeed part of creation or a creation in itself, then post it. In which case, OP's argument will be null. But If not, then Hitchen's Razon applies because the very premise of "Silver Sea is a Creation/Part of creation" becomes null owing to Sagan Standard.

 

[Reiner04]

That's not how the burden of proof works at all. OP doesn't need to provide any evidence as OP is not making a positive claim. OP is simply dismissing/denying the positive claim "Silver Sea is Creation/Part of Creation" because there is no evidence given for the claim (If I am understanding the OP correctly), aka Hitchen's Razor.
If anything, burden of proof is on the party making the positive claim that Silver Sea is Creation/Part of Creation.
Consequently, if evidence or implication is provided that it is the case, then the burden shifts on to the OP.

Claiming that something is not created requires more evidence, just same as claiming a person is unborn and existed since forever. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidences. That's where the OP turns itself into positive assertion.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

He claimed Silver Sea is not a Creation. Which is his point with zero scans

Again, I claimed that there is no proof that the Silver Sea is a creation. I'm not arguing against a known fact, I'm arguing against headcanon.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

But he also said this just above:

No scans ? Bruh it was stated to destroy anything which is boud to or unbound to Logic and Reason. Scans are already listed on Venozdonor profile. It's not our Burden to prove something.

Ultimately it boils down to whether Silver Sea is a Creation/Part of creation. If there is evidence or implication that Silver Sea is indeed part of creation or a creation in itself, then post it. In which case, OP's argument will be null. But If not, then Hitchen's Razon applies because the very premise of "Silver Sea is a Creation/Part of creation" becomes null owing to Sagan Standard.

1. Venozdonor AP doesn't even comes from Silver Sea being a creation or not. It comes from destroying the reason and Logic of everything.
2. Why Tf Silve sea needs to be a creation in the first place?
3. Also if multiple droplets of water gathers and forms a river doesn't that falls under a natural Creation feat?

 

[RM97]

Claiming that something is not created requires more evidence, just same as claiming a person is unborn and existed since forever. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidences. That's where the OP turns itself into positive assertion.

Uh no. We do not take such claims as axioms and not to mention, false equivalency because we have empirical evidence in terms of both quantitative and qualitative data that people are born and die due to limited lifespan and biological composition unless we have evidence otherwise that said person is Unborn and Existed since forever.

So again where is the evidence or implication that Silver Sea is a creation or part of a creation?

 

[RM97]

No scans ? Bruh it was stated to destroy anything which is boud to or unbound to Logic and Reason. Scans are already listed on Venozdonor profile. It's not our Burden to prove something.

1. Venozdonor AP doesn't even comes from Silver Sea being a creation or not. It comes from destroying the reason and Logic of everything.
2. Why Tf Silve sea needs to be a creation in the first place?
3. Also if multiple droplets of water gathers and forms a river doesn't that falls under a natural Creation feat?

Venoz AP is not my argument. I am specifically referring to the fact that someone making a positive claim needs evidence which is being contested in this thread by OP and others.

As for your multiple droplets of water, that would likely fall under natural creation feat yes.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

Claiming that something is not created requires more evidence, just same as claiming a person is unborn and existed since forever. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidences. That's where the OP turns itself into positive assertion.

For one, I just stated that I'm not claiming that the Silver Sea isn't a creation, but that there's no proof that it is. For two, we know what are creations within the MGnF verse, and we know how they were made. We know that Gods of Creation are born into Bubbles, and then they create Worlds inside those Bubbles. That's a known fact. Nothing about how examples of creations within the verse are suggests that the Silver Sea is a creation.

 

[PhantomØ4]

Holyyy shiiit, I look away for one second and now there is logical unequivocal empirical quantitative qualitative eristic inductive premise deconstructive axiom articulated arguments.

 

[Tarang123]

There are no scans that state that the Silver Sea is a creation to begin with.

Then prove that it isn't lol. If you want scans for that, then just ask first

 

[Reiner04]

Uh no. We do not take such claims as axioms as not to mention

We always do. Everything that exist has been created by natural causes or by someone. There is nothing in the entire history to point out otherwise and so, a common notion applies everywhere.

false equivalency because we have empirical evidence in terms of both quantitative and qualitative data that people are born and die due to limited lifespan and biological composition unless we have evidence otherwise that said person is Unborn and Existed.

Yeah, everything is born and everything will die one day is a nature's law. Nothing is hidden from it, is there?

 

[Tarang123]

You've summed it up perfectly. Proof is needed in order to make a claim. VsB claims that Venuzdonoa can destroy the Silver Sea, but there is no proof behind that claim. I'm not claiming that Venuzdonoa can't destroy the Silver Sea, but that there's no proof that it can. If there's no proof that it can, then it shouldn't be used as a fact.

Sure, but your downgrade is filled with plenty of claims, none of which have been proven by you. As for Venuzdonoa destroying the Silver Sea, considering how in-depth the verse goes into its power and how it can literally destroy everything, it scaling to the Silver Sea isn't out of the question. It doesn't necessarily need a blatant statement, you could infer it from info, even if evidence is nice

 

[MaxLevel_King]

Then prove that it isn't lol. If you want scans for that, then just ask first

I don't know why I need to keep emphasizing this; I'm not claiming that the Silver Sea isn't a creation. I'm claiming that we don't have proof that it is.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

We always do. Everything that exist has been created by natural causes or by someone. There is nothing in the entire history to point out otherwise and so, a common notion applies everywhere.

Yeah, everything is born and everything will die one day is a nature's law. Nothing is hidden from it, is there?

Why are you trying to apply this logic to a fictional verse that isn't realistic in the slightest?

 

[Tarang123]

I don't know why I need to keep emphasizing this; I'm not claiming that the Silver Sea isn't a creation. I'm claiming that we don't have proof that it is.

It's not "a creation". The question is if it's part of "all things in creation". It likely is if it's part of the cosmology. If it's not, then show evidence for that

 

[Planck69]

I have no stake in this, but I will say that one thing the original poster is right about is that Burden of Proof is on the positive claim.





Are there actual statements that Venuzdonoa can destroy the Silver Sea? This is especially relevant if it's indeed true that Anos wasn't aware of its existence when his statement that his sword can destroy all creations or whatever was made.



If there are then posting them would be a good debunk to the OP's claims. Or anything else that implies this level of power at least.

 

[Tarang123]

Why are you trying to apply this logic to a fictional verse that isn't realistic in the slightest?

Every fictional verse that isn't complete and utter fanfiction or nonsense follows real life to some extent. It may not follow everything here, but it has its similarities

 

[RM97]

We always do. Everything that exist has been created by natural causes or by someone. There is nothing in the entire history to point out otherwise and so, a common notion applies everywhere.

Yeah, everything is born and everything will die one day is a nature's law. Nothing is hidden from it, is there?

We don't. Your common notion is applicable only to this real world where we have evidence and empirical data to back up our assertions. We do not apply the same notion in fictional worlds.
Silver Sea being part of Creation is the same. Was it ever referred to as creation? Because OP's posts suggest otherwise and implies that the scope of "Creation" is inside the Silver Sea, but does not include it (even though he has not provided any evidence or scans for that).

 

[Tarang123]

I have no stake in this, but I will say that one thing the original poster is right about is that Burden of Proof is on the positive claim.





Are there actual statements that Venuzdonoa can destroy the Silver Sea? This is especially relevant if it's indeed true that Anos wasn't aware of its existence when his statement that his sword can destroy all creations or whatever was made.



If there are then posting them would be a good debunk to the OP's claims. Or anything else that implies this level of power at least.

That's a good point. I can't pretend to be super knowledgeable on the verse, but from what I've heard, the whole "destroy all things in creation" thing is pretty literal, and would likely apply to the Silver Sea unless it's somehow not part of "all of creation"

 

[RM97]

I have no stake in this, but I will say that one thing the original poster is right about is that Burden of Proof is on the positive claim.

Told ya.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

I have no stake in this, but I will say that one thing the original poster is right about is that Burden of Proof is on the positive claim.


Are there actual statements that Venuzdonoa can destroy the Silver Sea? This is especially relevant if it's indeed true that Anos wasn't aware of its existence when his statement that his sword can destroy all creations or whatever was made.


If there are then posting them would be a good debunk to the OP's claims. Or anything else that implies this level of power at least.

These same claims are already debunked & even @Ultima_Reality agreed Venozdonor scaling to Silver Sea. Thread is 2 years old. Let's wait dereck should have the link for that. I am just too lazy to look it up myself

 

[MaxLevel_King]

Sure, but your downgrade is filled with plenty of claims, none of which have been proven by you. As for Venuzdonoa destroying the Silver Sea, considering how in-depth the verse goes into its power and how it can literally destroy everything, it scaling to the Silver Sea isn't out of the question. It doesn't necessarily need a blatant statement, you could infer it from info, even if evidence is nice

What claims have I made that have no proof? The only claims I've made are that there is no evidence that the Silver Sea is a creation.

Also, all you've basically just said is that, "there's no proof that Venuzdonoa can do what I claim it can, but since it's a really powerful weapon in-verse, it probably can". That's called an assumption or headcanon. All that warrants at the most is a "Likely can destroy the Silver Sea", not "Can destroy the Silver Sea", especially when none of it's feats are remotely comparable.

 

[Reiner04]

Your common notion is applicable only to this real world

Yeah? I know, we do use irl logics if it's too common such as what I pointed out. Saying that earth in fiction will not be of same size as of irl earth is not something to claim off, saying a universe in fiction will not be atleast as big as observable universe is not something to claim off unless ofc there are scans to say so. Common notion does apply on each point in fiction unless a difference is shown.

 

[Reiner04]

Anyway joke aside from all things, if there is no scan that silversea is not a creation but just claim. Then i Disagree. Something as extraordinary as this requires more evidences and good scans. We cannot claim for a alien race to be immortal if there is no statement about if he can die.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

It's not "a creation". The question is if it's part of "all things in creation". It likely is if it's part of the cosmology. If it's not, then show evidence for that

Let me break it down;

1. At the time, Anos didn't know about the Silver Sea. He didn't even know that the World was inside a Bubble. So when he made that statement about "All of creation", he was referring to the World.

2. We know that Worlds in MGnF are created by their Gods of Creation. They are literally "Creation". However, the Silver Sea is never spoken of in this same vein.

 

[MaxLevel_King]

Anyway joke aside from all things, if there is no scan that silversea is not a creation but just claim. Then i Disagree. Something as extraordinary as this requires more evidences and good scans. We cannot claim for a alien race to be immortal if there is no statement about if he can die.

I swear I've repeated myself at least 5 times now. I'm not claiming that the Silver Sea isn't a creation. I'm claiming that there is no proof that it is a creation, and it is never implied that it is, especially going off of everything known in the story. This should be the last time I have to say this.

 

[Reiner04]

I'm not claiming that the Silver Sea isn't a creation.

You cannot stand neutral while defending the one side of the argument yk? If you're not claiming then there is nothing to debunk and so nothing to debate on, nothing to agree or disagree upon and so purpose of the thread doesn't exist.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Let me break it down;

1. At the time, Anos didn't know about the Silver Sea. He didn't even know that the World was inside a Bubble. So when he made that statement about "All of creation", he was referring to the World.

Really funny because it was implied Anos is reincarnation of Amur first demon king of Silver Sea. Read the series before claiming some random shit

2. We know that Worlds in MGnF are created by their Gods of Creation. They are literally "Creation". However, the Silver Sea is never spoken of in this same vein.

Funny thing because Graham doesn't comes under those Creations and still got packed up.

I swear I've repeated myself at least 5 times now. I'm not claiming that the Silver Sea isn't a creation. I'm claiming that there is no proof that it is a creation, and it is never implied that it is, especially going off of everything known in the story. This should be the last time I have to say this.

You never explained why Silver Sea needs to be a creation to gets Negged by Venozdonor.

Prove Silver Sea doesn't falls under natural Creation. If not your whole OP gets debunked by yourself for burden of proof.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Official LN English TRANSLATION. @MaxLevel_King show me where it was stated it is only limited to Creation?

I pointed the blade at Ivis’s throat. “I’ll answer you as a gift to take to the afterlife. This is Venuzdonoa, the Abolisher of Reason—the demon sword of the founder, destroyer of anything in existence. Be it providence, fate, or a miracle, all will bow down before me and disappear.”

No matter how sturdy, how eternal, or how infinite a thing was, Venuzdonoa could destroy it—even reason itself. Reason was meaningless before the Sword of Devastation.

 

[Planck69]

Wait, did Anos not know of the Silver Sea when he made that comment?