I'm actually a skeptic, I fight conspiracy theories.. And strangely enough.. you can find those same processes of thoughts in the One Piece community.
That's why my approach is different. I'm using actual knowledge on storytelling to analyse the story instead of headcanons and inventions. If you were reading my post correctly, you would know that I never opens the gates of theorizing without storytelling evidences..
The problem is that I'm facing people who question the actual knowledge behind the craft. In fact you could say that those people are using the same rethoric as flat earther when they are faced with science: "I have no proof I can understand, therefore it's not true"
What a way to make the "ennemy" look like a fool, attack him then predict that he will defend himself and make that future defense look like something coming from someone unintelligent..
Nice.
That's why my approach is different. I'm using actual knowledge on storytelling to analyse the story instead of headcanons and inventions. If you were reading my post correctly, you would know that I never opens the gates of theorizing without storytelling evidences..
The problem is that I'm facing people who question the actual knowledge behind the craft. In fact you could say that those people are using the same rethoric as flat earther when they are faced with science: "I have no proof I can understand, therefore it's not true"
What a way to make the "ennemy" look like a fool, attack him then predict that he will defend himself and make that future defense look like something coming from someone unintelligent..
Nice.
Post automatically merged:
Now imagine those admiral attacking Wano..