Hangout One Piece Mega Convo Thread

[Freid]

Fair, but when you say the closer to something you get to, the harder is to see. That is applicable in instances where one isn't looking at the big picture and not so much in the sense of analysing.

As you said, nothing wrong with a difference of opinion. The only thing I really say is if a question is asked, and there's no answer, there's nothing wrong in sharing ideas or brain-storming. However, if there is an answer given to a question had in the Manga, then can it really be said that one is tunnel visioned if the answer they're giving you is the answer?

You are versed in mechanical engineering. If I asked you how a gas turbine works, I'd assume you could explain it and give me the answer. When there is a definite answer to a question, then do you think it's reasonable for me to say that is your opinion on how gas turbines work even though what you're stating are actual facts? If I asked you how a turbine works 100 times, you'd likely give me the same answer 100 times because it's not a matter of opinion, but fact. Turbine may not be the best example, but I'm certain that there are things in your field that you know are just facts, and can't be considered opinion where I can't say you're tunnel-visioned.

Fair enough, you think the Ancient Weapon is One Piece. The thing is to say that, you need to have evidence from the Manga to say that unless there have been no hints or answers regarding what it is.

I think instances where imagination is necessary are regarding things that are unknown such as the location of Emerald city. The Manga doesn't seem to tell us where it was, so we could throw ideas here and there or share opinions because we don't have any facts or hints to go on to narrow down how we come to a conclusion.

Anyway, I think this is probably the most civil discussion we've had, lol. It's not my intention to insult or agitate anyone. Hopefully, can move on from here and have more discussions like this.

Yeah sounds good to me dude. No offence meant on my end either!

 

[roggie]

AND YET THEY DID NOTHING

They could, but what I'm saying is that it could be pretty hard even if Bege came up with the plan way before he met Big Mom.

Wouldn't a slice be a bite?

They did nothing indeed.

A slice is a piece that's not in directly contact with the rest of the fruit. Do you think I could keep it in the fridge and it would still retain it's magical properties? Does devil fruits even rot?? Could I make a dehydrated devil fruit??? Those, my friend, are the real questions

Well, finding something nice is subjective. Finding something nice doesn't really determine whether something is true or not. The only thing that does that is facts

No, it doesn't determine (whether something is true). As logic, in regards of a fictional story. Ultimately, there are no facts nor evidences here. Just words, just a good and well thought story, not bound to reality.
When I analyse a movie I follow the story, the hints that are shown (chekov's gun, as I learned here lol), etc
But not only what's bound to the story. I take into account the director, his style, his previous movies, the behave of a character (like "the typical guy that's going to die"), the expected plot twist presence, movie patterns (the good guy ends with the princess), what we should expect from the genre of the movie ("what would be nice"!), even how much time we have til the end of it.
That's how I analyse one-piece, WHEN I do analyse. Usually I just grab the popcorn and let it unfold.
So, sorry, but I wont always give you or anyone a "scientific answer" about a guess. But I hope you don't take it as less valid than your guesses.

Except you're suggesting we shouldn't believe what the Manga says.

What I meant is when the time arrives, that's what he will be doing since long before

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

No, it doesn't determine (whether something is true). As logic, in regards of a fictional story. Ultimately, there are no facts nor evidences here. Just words, just a good and well thought story, not bound to reality.

Words are not what determine whether something is fact or opinion. Words are just tools to express and communicate things.

Just because it's a fictional story doesn't mean there are no facts within that Story.

For example, it's a fact Shirahoshi is Poseidon. Just because it's a story doesn't mean there are no facts.

The main character's name is Luffy, just because it's a story doesn't mean there are no facts.

In every story, there are facts.

That's how I analyse one-piece, WHEN I do analyse. Usually I just grab the popcorn and let it unfold.
So, sorry, but I wont always give you or anyone a "scientific answer" about a guess. But I hope you don't take it as less valid than your guesses.

A guess is a conclusion made without evidence or utilisation of facts. If all you're doing is guessing, then it means you're not coming to conclusions based off any piece of evidence and that really does make it somewhat invalid because it's unreliable.

If you intend to have any beliefs without being able to support them with evidence, then there's really no reason to discuss it. .

It really has nothing to do with giving scientific answers, it's simple just being logical. If the story informs us about something, then it is a fact.

I can ask you how do you know Ancient Weapons can destroy the world? And you'd have to resort to facts... the Manga told us, that's why you know this.

Being unwilling to support any belief with fact can only be because:

• Lacking evidence.

And being respectful, one would really have to discard such a belief as there's nothing to give it much credence.

 

[roggie]

Words are not what determine whether something is fact or opinion. Words are just tools to express and communicate things.

Just because it's a fictional story doesn't mean there are no facts within that Story.

For example, it's a fact Shirahoshi is Poseidon. Just because it's a story doesn't mean there are no facts.

The main character's name is Luffy, just because it's a story doesn't mean there are no facts.

In every story, there are facts.



A guess is a conclusion made without evidence or utilisation of facts. If all you're doing is guessing, then it means you're not coming to conclusions based off any piece of evidence and that really does make it somewhat invalid because it's unreliable.

If you intend to have any beliefs without being able to support them with evidence, then there's really no reason to discuss it. .

It really has nothing to do with giving scientific answers, it's simple just being logical. If the story informs us about something, then it is a fact.

I can ask you how do you know Ancient Weapons can destroy the world? And you'd have to resort to facts... the Manga told us, that's why you know this.

Being unwilling to support any belief with fact can only be because:

• Lacking evidence.

And being respectful, one would really have to discard such a belief as there's nothing to give it much credence.

A firm belief can lead to bigger mistakes than humble guesses.

I question you, are they (facts)? Just like Sabo dead was a fact? Pell dead? Katakuri never put his back on the ground? People that claim they will become pirate king? Luffy won't run from his enemies anymore? Frankie says the Yomi-no-mi has no further powers after ressurrect Brook (ch. 443)? Moria/Luffy says Sanji has silver hair (ch. 455)? Sanji not knowing about devil fruits when he first met Luffy (ch. 66/464)? a hakiless war (at least the way haki is being used lately)? Shanks having his arm eaten by a sea monster?

They may be facts, but only MANGA facts. Point is, they can be and have been proved wrong now and then. It's like using a panel with two people to state their size, as if they couldn't be drawn with wrong proportions. Ideas change over time and may result in different conclusions, while true, real facts won't. Even if the manga told me Ancient weapons can destroy the world i realize it may not be true, do you?

And a guess doesn't need to be baseless, i just said there is much more than manga facts to that. When you thought Luffy wouldn't die after being poisoned by Magellan were your guess backed up by evidence or you just concluded he wouldn't die because he was the protagonist?
Yes, my guesses are unreliable, as yours and everybody else.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

A firm belief can lead to bigger mistakes than humble guesses.

Since when is guessing a form of humility? It isn't. Guessing is simply an act one does when they can't make sense of things.

There's no such thing as a firm belief can lead to bigger mistakes. Believing something is not a precursory to mistakes. Believing the wrong thing can be precursory to mistakes rather. Thus, the reason why any belief must be based on evidence, (e.g. Incarcerating or Imprisoning the wrong person as a result of no evidence).

You believe Ice is cold. So, what mistake is to be wroth from that? What you're saying really makes no sense.

I question you, are they (facts)? Just like Sabo dead was a fact? Pell dead? Katakuri never put his back on the ground? People that claim they will become pirate king? Luffy won't run from his enemies anymore? Frankie says the Yomi-no-mi has no further powers after ressurrect Brook (ch. 443)? Moria/Luffy says Sanji has silver hair (ch. 455)? Sanji not knowing about devil fruits when he first met Luffy (ch. 66/464)? a hakiless war (at least the way haki is being used lately)? Shanks having his arm eaten by a sea monster?

What you're not distinguishing here is facts are based on evidence in form of proven statements or observations.

1. Of course the main character's name is Luffy - fact. Evidence - We see the main character being called Luffy, therefore, that is his name.
2. Of course Shirahoshi is Poseidon - fact. Evidence - We saw Shirahoshi control Sea Kings.

It seems you don't know how to tell fact from mere statements.

1. Sabo being dead was never a fact because it was never confirmed as we never saw a body, therefore, there was no evidence.
2. Pell being dead was never confirmed due to lack of evidence, more so when we see someone a hat that belonged to Pell to what seemed to be the owner, so evidence implied otherwise regarding his death.
3. Katakuri never laying on his back was never confirmed due to lack of evidence.

A claim and a fact are different things. Claims are just statements and facts are statements backed up with evidence.

People claiming they will become Pirate King is merely a statement, a claim, not a fact. What is a fact is that people claim they will be Pirate King.

Brook also never said the Yomi Yomi no Mi has no further abilities.

Sanji never claimed he knew nothing about DFs and no idea where you're getting Sanji has silver hair from.

The war was also not "Hakiless", it was used.

How you can even question if Shanks' arm was eaten by a seamonster is quite ridiculous because it's a fact.

The only thing you've proven here is you don't know how to determine facts which I think is a feign on your part for the sake of trying to make a point that has no point.

And a guess doesn't need to be baseless

A guess is fundamentally baseless. Guesses don't require evidence, therefore, that are somewhat baseless as they're not based on anything to justify them.

i just said there is much more than manga facts to that. When you thought Luffy wouldn't die after being poisoned by Magellan were your guess backed up by evidence or you just concluded he wouldn't die because he was the protagonist?
Yes, my guesses are unreliable, as yours and everybody else.

That is however wrong. Facts are what every truth is founded on.

Luffy not dying is due to the fact he's the protagonist and this being a story that relies on him, otherwise, the series ends. That is evidence.

If all you do is guess, then anything you say is fundamentally unreliable.

I don't make guesses, I make informed deductions based on evidence. Therefore, as that is my approach, what I say if based on evidence isn't unreliable while if you simply guess which is all you've done lately, all such statement is unreliable as it's made with insufficient evidence.

 

[hokageji]

Just a thought occured to me, Has anyone thought of Wealth, Fame and Power connected to the holy trinity?
Atleast in hinduism, it makes sense.
Brahma: The creator
Wife: Saraswati - goddess of knowledge
VIshnu: The preserver, Sustenance
Wife: Laxmi - goddess of wealth
Shiva: The destroyer
Wife: Durga - goddess of Power...

To create something, you need Knowledge, To sustain something, you need wealth and to destroy something, you need Power...

Just wanted to see Knowledge can be an interpreted translation for the Japanese word from Roger's dialogue, currently called as Fame.

 

[nik87]

@Hannibal Psyche

 

[roggie]

Since when is guessing a form of humility? It isn't. Guessing is simply an act one does when they can't make sense of things.

There's no such thing as a firm belief can lead to bigger mistakes. Believing something is not a precursory to mistakes. Believing the wrong thing can be precursory to mistakes rather. Thus, the reason why any belief must be based on evidence, (e.g. Incarcerating or Imprisoning the wrong person as a result of no evidence).

You believe Ice is cold. So, what mistake is to be wroth from that? What you're saying really makes no sense.



What you're not distinguishing here is facts are based on evidence in form of proven statements or observations.

1. Of course the main character's name is Luffy - fact. Evidence - We see the main character being called Luffy, therefore, that is his name.
2. Of course Shirahoshi is Poseidon - fact. Evidence - We saw Shirahoshi control Sea Kings.

It seems you don't know how to tell fact from mere statements.

1. Sabo being dead was never a fact because it was never confirmed as we never saw a body, therefore, there was no evidence.
2. Pell being dead was never confirmed due to lack of evidence, more so when we see someone a hat that belonged to Pell to what seemed to be the owner, so evidence implied otherwise regarding his death.
3. Katakuri never laying on his back was never confirmed due to lack of evidence.

A claim and a fact are different things. Claims are just statements and facts are statements backed up with evidence.

People claiming they will become Pirate King is merely a statement, a claim, not a fact. What is a fact is that people claim they will be Pirate King.

Brook also never said the Yomi Yomi no Mi has no further abilities.

Sanji never claimed he knew nothing about DFs and no idea where you're getting Sanji has silver hair from.

The war was also not "Hakiless", it was used.

How you can even question if Shanks' arm was eaten by a seamonster is quite ridiculous because it's a fact.

The only thing you've proven here is you don't know how to determine facts which I think is a feign on your part for the sake of trying to make a point that has no point.



A guess is fundamentally baseless. Guesses don't require evidence, therefore, that are somewhat baseless as they're not based on anything to justify them.

That is however wrong. Facts are what every truth is founded on.

Luffy not dying is due to the fact he's the protagonist and this being a story that relies on him, otherwise, the series ends. That is evidence.

If all you do is guess, then anything you say is fundamentally unreliable.

I don't make guesses, I make informed deductions based on evidence. Therefore, as that is my approach, what I say if based on evidence isn't unreliable while if you simply guess which is all you've done lately, all such statement is unreliable as it's made with insufficient evidence.

Man, you go so hard to being right that you not only make no effort to understand what people are saying but you twist and generalize when it fits your argument.
And because people doesn't have your energy to keep answering volumes of arguments that doesn't makes you necessarily correct.

1. I was not talking about that small things like Luffys name. I think I said it.
2. You are the one to use claims and statements as facts. That's why I put it all in the same bag. Funny you come accusing me about not knowing the difference.
3. Sanji didn't know Luffy couldn't swim when they first met. Go see for yourself, I was kind enough to put the chapter before, but I say it again, chapter 66. Then in thriller bark he says he read a book and the invisible fruit is his dream, regardless of the drawbacks and curses.
4. Yes, I do estimatives based on incomplete information. My point is, so do you. Of course I'm not talking about if Luffy is Luffy.
5. I Know shanks lost his arm to a sea monster. I said it doesn't make sense, since he should be way stronger than it.
6. I know they used haki on the war. But it's only a vague presence. Of course you will call for evidences here. Maybe I reread the war and put it in next posts.
7. Everything is so clear in your way of view things. Now Luffy being protagonist is also evidence, ok. I'm a little confused here because when I say such stuff I'm doing baseless claims. I think sometimes you have double standards. But trying to be more clear, I'm not disputing your inferences when you show clear evidence. Problem is when you think your evidence is clear, you won't listen to the possibility there's more. Then you demand evidence and it's hard to support evidence for the possibility of something. You fail to realize absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence.
8. About firm beliefs based on evidence, problem is not when you do, but when you don't but you act like you do. As you yourself do, in fact.
I suggest you read the invisible gorilla, I think you may find it truly interesting and I'm sure easier to comprehend than myself.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

Man, you go so hard to being right that you not only make no effort to understand what people are saying but you twist and generalize when it fits your argument.
And because people doesn't have your energy to keep answering volumes of arguments that doesn't makes you necessarily correct.

Nope, I perfectly understand what you're saying. The point is that it's flawed and illogical to state that facts are not a thing.

1. I was not talking about that small things like Luffys name. I think I said it.

Small or not, the point is that even within the story, facts exist. Small or Big isn't what defines a fact. Evidence is what defines a fact.

2. You are the one to use claims and statements as facts. That's why I put it all in the same bag. Funny you come accusing me about not knowing the difference.

Clearly, you do not.

How can you ask if Shirahoshi is truly an Ancient Weapon if you knew what a fact was?

A proven statement is a fact.

3. Sanji didn't know Luffy couldn't swim when they first met. Go see for yourself, I was kind enough to put the chapter before, but I say it again, chapter 66. Then in thriller bark he says he read a book and the invisible fruit is his dream, regardless of the drawbacks and curses.

You've more or less contradicted yourself which is pretty hypocritical. You say facts don't exist, yet you're trying to use evidence to make a point which you claim to be impossible.

5. I Know shanks lost his arm to a sea monster. I said it doesn't make sense, since he should be way stronger than it.

Nope, wrong.

He allowed it to happen, thus the reason he said it was a bet.

Allowing one's self to be mutilated isn't proof of being weak or strong. It's proof of making a choice for whatever reason.

4. Yes, I do estimatives based on incomplete information. My point is, so do you. Of course I'm not talking about if Luffy is Luffy.

Nope, that's false.

I never make conclusions based on incomplete information, you do.

When the Manga tells us the answer to a question, that is the answer.

You on the other hand make claims you can't remotely justify as the Manga never remotely validates those claims.

I have claims to prove One Piece is the Poneglyph.

You on the other hand have absolutely nothing to prove your points.

7. Everything is so clear in your way of view things. Now Luffy being protagonist is also evidence, ok. I'm a little confused here because when I say such stuff I'm doing baseless claims.

Nope, the point is you make baseless claims because they're devoid of evidence. That's the difference between myself and yourself.

Nevertheless....

I have things that I've stated years in advance and have proven themselves true because I base my opinion on evidence. Not one, not twice, not thrice. It essentially means my methodology in deducing things are accurate.

--- Double Post Merged, May 25, 2018, Original Post Date: May 25, 2018 ---

Problem is when you think your evidence is clear, you won't listen to the possibility there's more. Then you demand evidence and it's hard to support evidence for the possibility of something.

So you're saying when evidence clearly infers something, that it's wrong to believe it? Ok, that's new.

The possibility that there's more requires evidence. You cannot just blindly claim there's more to something without indicating how you know that and what that is the case. That is illogical.

Then you demand evidence and it's hard to support evidence for the possibility of something. You fail to realize absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence.

Of course, it's only rational to ask for evidence.

And you're making a grave mistake here. The absence of evidence is only invoked when absence proves something definitive.

For example, someone has a cancer tumour, and after therapy, an ultrasound is performed to locate whether the tumour is still present. In the case that it is not, then the absence of the tumour (evidence) is proof of no cancer.

So, you're really just misusing the concept of absence of evidence.

You can't just invoke that claim as if that is a general rule of thumb and principle in proving things. What you really did here was simply take it out of context.

The way in which you're using said concept is like saying that you (whom I assume to be male) lacks female organs (but possesses male organs) isn't proof that you're not also a female. By your logic, one could claim that just because you're not physically showcasing female features doesn't mean you're not a female. That makes no sense at all. This concept cannot just be used like that because.

--- Double Post Merged, May 25, 2018 ---

@Hannibal Psyche

Wrong genius.

1. I never said it wasn't risky, lol.
2. Also never said they didn't want to ask permission.
3. Even if the WG approved, it doesn't mean it still wouldn't be risky because the WG doesn't represent every individual. People like Stelly who are ignorant view the Fishman in negative light and fear them, and thus are likely to hurt them as a result.

Good job on pointing out the obvious.

In fact, you said they've been going to the Reverie, you were terribly wrong, lol. They've only been once. So, good job buddy.

Going is a present participle, meaning an action that has been continuously occurring. To go to something once in 200 years isn't a participle, it's a past tense. It's a gone rather than going. So, good job again.

 

[nik87]

Wrong genius.

1. I never said it wasn't risky, lol.
2. Also never said they didn't want to ask permission.

Good job on pointing out the obvious.

So what is your wrong back then for and what is it for this time? Go back and re-read our discussion about it.Your point was that they cant go to the surface without Luffy. I like proving you wrong.
Wrong genius, i said they have been going to the surface.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

So what is your wrong back then for and what is it for this time? Go back and re-read our discussion about it.Your point was that they cant go to the surface without Luffy. I like proving you wrong.
Wrong genius, i said they have been going to the surface.

Nope genius. My point was that their wish to integrate into surface society would only be made possible through the SH, not the Tenryuubito. All they're doing here is attending the Reverie,

They also haven't been going to the Reverie, they've only gone once in the past 200 years. Going is an on-going thing, not a 1 time thing. Learn the difference buddy.

 

[nik87]

Nope genius. My point was that their wish to integrate into surface society would only be made possibly through the SH, not the Tenryuubito. All they're doing here is attending the Reverie,

That's obviously wrong, if they got the approval at the Reverie they dont need the SH. Why ask at all if its not possible, lmao.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

That's obviously wrong, if they got the approval at the Reverie they dont need the SH. Why ask at all if its not possible, lmao.

Nope, genius.

Asking doesn't guarantee anything.

Being able to ask something doesn't mean what is asked would be approved.

Just because I ask the president for a million dollars doesn't mean I'm going to get it.

This isn't even a case of it being possible, it's obviously possible. The point is will they get approved?

If they get approval.. you do know what an if statement is right? If isn't a statement of certainty, but uncertainty. Therefore, there's a chance they get declined even if the opposite is possible.

This is where insight and context takes precedence which you lack in abundance.

Point is this story is based on glorifying the SHs, not the WG who are the antagonist of this story, so obviously, they're heavily likely going to be declined in order for the story to glorify the SH crew.

You're already assuming the Tenryuubito would agree which requires the Tenryuubito to be reasonable folk which they're clearly not.

Just because something is possible doesn't mean it'd be approved.

Again, good job buddy.

 

[nik87]

@Hannibal Psyche Spoke a lot, said nothing, like usual.

The point of moving is so they can acquaint themselves with Humans and get along with them in time. They believe all humans are evil, Otohime is trying to convince them not all Humans are evil, thus the reason she wants them to emigrate as soon as possible.

You are saying they can live on the surface just because they want to, simply by trying to get along with humans. I told you thats not possible without backing of WG or Luffy. As you see they are going for the approval from the WG, declined or approved is not relevant here. What is relevant is that you are wrong and they cant just go and try to get along.

Going is an on-going thing, not a 1 time thing. Learn the difference buddy.

For the third time genius, slow down, take a deep breath and read what i respond. I said they have been going to the surface multiple times.

Point of that discussion was, me claiming that Luffy never needs to return to FI and you claiming otherwise, since he has to take FIshmen to the surface. As you can see they reached surface without Luffy.

 

[roggie]

Man, you talk so much that i lose myself in your replies! So, sorry in advance if i skip some part or answer out of order.

The way in which you're using said concept is like saying that you (whom I assume to be male) lacks female organs (but possesses male organs) isn't proof that you're not also a female. By your logic, one could claim that just because you're not physically showcasing female features doesn't mean you're not a female. That makes no sense at all. This concept cannot just be used like that because.

If i got it right, i really think so. If i'm not physically showcasing female features doesnt mean i'm not a woman. I maybe hiding them.
Using your own example, the way i perceive your approach is if an individual has male organs you claim with stubbornly assuredness he is a man. While i would say he is not a woman. You ask for evidence and i have none, but centuries later hermaphrodites are find out, witch makes you wrong and not me.

Small or not, the point is that even within the story, facts exist. Small or Big isn't what defines a fact. Evidence is what defines a fact.

You still fail to realize those alleged facts of yours are bound not to reality, but the changes and limitations of the failable mind of a human beinig. Thus, i call them pseudo facts.

Nope, wrong.

He allowed it to happen, thus the reason he said it was a bet.

Allowing one's self to be mutilated isn't proof of being weak or strong. It's proof of making a choice for whatever reason.

Ok, i can't discuss this point any further. If you choose to blindly believe in someone's else writings, that's your baseless opinion (unless you can show me some evidence). To me, to have an arm is important. Makes you weaker not having one. To become weaker pushes you further away from become Pirate King. Since there was no need to lose an arm, i fail to see the logic behind this bet. Was this bet necessary? was it essential to let it happen?

Nope, I perfectly understand what you're saying. The point is that it's flawed and illogical to state that facts are not a thing.

So i'm the one who said something and i can't have a say if someone else understood it right or not. More incredible, there is no doubt if said person got it right. It's absurd to merely cogitate there could be something wrong. Ok, seems logical...

So you're saying when evidence clearly infers something, that it's wrong to believe it? Ok, that's new.

Nope, that's not what i'm saying, which is evidence that you did not perfectly understood what i was saying, meaning you were wrong, not once, but twice. Serious my fellow forum user, read it, the invisible gorilla, it may open your eyes to some of the main cognitive mistakes our mind does.
What i was saying, in algebra terms is: if A leads to B, it doesn't mean A can't lead also to C. And i go beyond it, "clearly infers" may be subjective, sometimes B happens after A but not because of A. "Correlation doesnt imply causation", is that the saying?

I have things that I've stated years in advance and have proven themselves true because I base my opinion on evidence. Not one, not twice, not thrice. It essentially means my methodology in deducing things are accurate.

This part made me baffled. Although you always play the overconfident, self assured part, usually you are more humble about your feats. To that i can quote (yes, i like quotes, sorry if it sounds cheesy) "even a broken clock is right twice a day". Don't get me wrong (again!! ahaha), your researching and organizing skills, dedication, patience, etc are amazing, it's really impressive. But, and that but is what aaaaaaal this is about, you over estimate your capabilities and casually forget you make wrong previsions too. A lot. But of course, that's normal, everybody gives wrong previsions. Show me a man that says he can predict the future and i show you a liar.

--- Double Post Merged, May 25, 2018, Original Post Date: May 25, 2018 ---

@Hannibal Psyche Point of that discussion was, me claiming that Luffy never needs to return to FI and you claiming otherwise, since he has to take FIshmen to the surface. As you can see they reached surface without Luffy.

Nik, I will steal your topic to use as an example to show what i'm trying to say to our dear fellow. @Hannibal Psyche some of your inferences, your "clear evidences" were such things as "so Luffy has to defeat Big Mom, otherwise she will destroy Fishman Island". While in my baseless assumptions i guessed, right, by sheer luck, that in the present context Luffy couldn't defeat her. IMO your conjecture was good as mine, in the end of the day they were both guesses. And that's what i'm talking about since the beggining, i know i'm guessinig while you are dreamily believing you are backed by evidences.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

If i got it right, i really think so. If i'm not physically showcasing female features doesnt mean i'm not a woman. I maybe hiding them.
Using your own example, the way i perceive your approach is if an individual has male organs you claim with stubbornly assuredness he is a man. While i would say he is not a woman. You ask for evidence and i have none, but centuries later hermaphrodites are find out, witch makes you wrong and not me.

Lol, no, it's not a case of hiding.

The point is evidence is how we come to define things as true and facts.

What you're talking about is about hiding or covering the truth or trying to mislead.

You still fail to realize those alleged facts of yours are bound not to reality, but the changes and limitations of the failable mind of a human beinig. Thus, i call them pseudo facts.

Wrong buddy.

They're facts.

I can provide you with countless facts and you would fail to refute every single one of them:

The main character's name is Luffy.

1. Zoro is a Swordsman.
2. Luffy and co. are currently heading to Wano.
3. Law has a DF ability.
4. Shanks only has 1 arm.
5. Shirahoishi is a mermaid.
6. Usopp has a long nose.
7. Whitebeard and Ace are dead.

Have fun trying to prove these aren't facts.

They're not my facts, they're facts of the story, lol.

Ok, i can't discuss this point any further. If you choose to blindly believe in someone's else writings, that's your baseless opinion (unless you can show me some evidence). To me, to have an arm is important. Makes you weaker not having one. To become weaker pushes you further away from become Pirate King. Since there was no need to lose an arm, i fail to see the logic behind this bet. Was this bet necessary? was it essential to let it happen?

Lol, your logic is wrong though.

Here is what you said:

5. I Know shanks lost his arm to a sea monster. I said it doesn't make sense, since he should be way stronger than it.

Shanks is a Human, therefore he doesn't have impenetrable flesh, lol.

Sea Kings have razor sharp teeth, they can easily tear off flesh.

Shanks could easily have used Haki to stop it from taking off his arm. He didn't.

Doesn't make him weaker because the Sea King took off his arm. He just let it happen.

Your logic suggests that since Katakuri got injured by his trident, his trident is stronger than him since you claim that because Shanks got bitten by a Seaking, the Seaking is stronger than Shanks.

Nope, that's not what i'm saying, which is evidence that you did not perfectly understood what i was saying, meaning you were wrong, not once, but twice. Serious my fellow forum user, read it, the invisible gorilla, it may open your eyes to some of the main cognitive mistakes our mind does.
What i was saying, in algebra terms is: if A leads to B, it doesn't mean A can't lead also to C. And i go beyond it, "clearly infers" may be subjective, sometimes B happens after A but not because of A. "Correlation doesnt imply causation", is that the saying?

Nope, wrong buddy.

Point is this is not subjective, it's fact, lol.

Zoro being a Swordsman is not subjective, it's a fact.

You obviously do not understand the concept of facts.

--- Double Post Merged, May 25, 2018, Original Post Date: May 25, 2018 ---

Nik, I will steal your topic to use as an example to show what i'm trying to say to our dear fellow. @Hannibal Psyche some of your inferences, your "clear evidences" were such things as "so Luffy has to defeat Big Mom, otherwise she will destroy Fishman Island". While in my baseless assumptions i guessed, right, by sheer luck, that in the present context Luffy couldn't defeat her. IMO your conjecture was good as mine, in the end of the day they were both guesses. And that's what i'm talking about since the beggining, i know i'm guessinig while you are dreamily believing you are backed by evidences.

Nope buddy.

Those were Deductions. Apparently you don't know the difference. Me claiming Luffy has to defeat Big Mom because of the consequences is a deduction and More so since the Manga actually states so, lol.

You clearly don't know that there are 2 main forms of guessing:

1. Evidence based guessing.
2. Random guessing.

I make evidence based guesses, educated guesses, and that comes from deduction.

You're making random guesses.

Evidence based guesses is how one deduces.

Not all guesses are equal, friend.

^ That is a deduction, educated guess, and for the most part, when people deduce things with facts, it's nigh impossible to be wrong, lol. This is just one of many of deductions I've done that have been proven to be correct, buddy.

Even if a random guess which you apparently only practice can be right, it doesn't mean the methodology is correct. Just imagine if Doctors were guessing what illnesses and diseases patients had, and then just decide to guess what drug or what procedure to perform.

In an exam, if you guess your answers, just because you get it right doesn't validate the process. Nonetheless, someone who guesses and someone who answers questions based on evidence, it's clear who will graduate from that exam with good results. Just because the random guess was correct doesn't mean the process is as good as doing things logically and with a working methodology, therefore, they're certainly not equal. Your conjecture in essence wasn't as good as mine since it was just a guess, there was no logic to justify it.

 

[roggie]

Lol, no, it's not a case of hiding.

The point is evidence is how we come to define things as true and facts.

What you're talking about is about hiding or covering the truth or trying to mislead.



Wrong buddy.

They're facts.

I can provide you with countless facts and you would fail to refute every single one of them:

The main character's name is Luffy.

1. Zoro is a Swordsman.
2. Luffy and co. are currently heading to Wano.
3. Law has a DF ability.
4. Shanks only has 1 arm.
5. Shirahoishi is a mermaid.
6. Usopp has a long nose.
7. Whitebeard and Ace are dead.

Have fun trying to prove these aren't facts.

They're not my facts, they're facts of the story, lol.



Lol, your logic is wrong though.

Here is what you said:


Shanks is a Human, therefore he doesn't have impenetrable flesh, lol.

Sea Kings have razor sharp teeth, they can easily tear off flesh.

Shanks could easily have used Haki to stop it from taking off his arm. He didn't.

Doesn't make him weaker because the Sea King took off his arm. He just let it happen.

Your logic suggests that since Katakuri got injured by his trident, his trident is stronger than him since you claim that because Shanks got bitten by a Seaking, the Seaking is stronger than Shanks.



Nope, wrong buddy.

Point is this is not subjective, it's fact, lol.

Zoro being a Swordsman is not subjective, it's a fact.

You obviously do not understand the concept of facts.

--- Double Post Merged, May 25, 2018, Original Post Date: May 25, 2018 ---

Nope buddy.

Those were Deductions. Apparently you don't know the difference. Me claiming Luffy has to defeat Big Mom because of the consequences is a deduction and More so since the Manga actually states so, lol.

You clearly don't know that there are 2 main forms of guessing:

1. Evidence based guessing.
2. Random guessing.

I make evidence based guesses, educated guesses, and that comes from deduction.

You're making random guesses.

Evidence based guesses is how one deduces.

Not all guesses are equal, friend.

^ That is a deduction, educated guess, and for the most part, when people deduce things with facts, it's nigh impossible to be wrong, lol. This is just one of many of deductions I've done that have been proven to be correct, buddy.

Even if a random guess which you apparently only practice can be right, it doesn't mean the methodology is correct. Just imagine if Doctors were guessing what illnesses and diseases patients had, and then just decide to guess what drug or what procedure to perform.

In an exam, if you guess your answers, just because you get it right doesn't validate the process. Nonetheless, someone who guesses and someone who answers questions based on evidence, it's clear who will graduate from that exam with good results. Just because the random guess was correct doesn't mean the process is as good as doing things logically and with a working methodology, therefore, they're certainly not equal. Your conjecture in essence wasn't as good as mine since it was just a guess, there was no logic to justify it.

Ok ok. Nice talk buddy. Though I will end up it here.
Still I do educated guesses. Maybe not as educated as yours, but I don't know where you took it that I make completely randomic hunches. It's kind of rude to say it.
G'day mate.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

Ok ok. Nice talk buddy. Though I will end up it here.
Still I do educated guesses. Maybe not as educated as yours, but I don't know where you took it that I make completely randomic hunches. It's kind of rude to say it.
G'day mate.

Well, you did say:

While in my baseless assumptions i guessed, right, by sheer luck

You said you guessed right by sheer luck. Educated guesses aren't made by sheer luck, they're made by referring to evidence to base an opinion.

Earlier, you wanted to say there's more to One Piece than the Poneglyph. To say so on just a hunch is not really an educated guess. It's a random guess.

You also said there are no facts in the Manga because it's "just a story". To say that is rather contradictory to the concept of educated guesses. If there are no facts, then no educated guesses can be made.

Anyway, I won't respond anymore even if you respond to this just to end things here.

 

[goldb]

Just a thought on a post I just read, I wonder if we'll have any of the creator descendants meet the current rulers of their kingdoms? So far the only known instance is Doflamingo meeting King Riku. I'd like to see it, even if it's just in passing.

I imagine the descendants would be so far removed from the situation they wouldn't care/acknowledge the current rulers but if there are any like Homing, that would make for a good page or panels at least.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

Info from Ace Volume 2 Novel

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 4, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 4, 2018 ---

Now, we have proof that Whitebeard is even stronger than Kaido even back then. Also confirms the 3 main Pirates of the prior era were Roger, Whitebeard and Shiki. The rest were up & comers and probably only rose up prominently after he didn't claim the throne. This explains what Chinjao said even more regarding Luffy surpassing Roger. There were less Emperors back then than there are now, so conquering the Grand Line is a much more difficult task now than it was then.

Then there's the possible parallel we have here:

1. Ace challenges Whitebeard from Fishman Island, then joins him.
2. Luffy challenges Big Mom from Fishman Island, and claims they'll join him, lol.