Active Users:1083 Time:01/11/2024 04:07:34 AM
That's quite a leap of logic... fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM

According to Brandon, at the most, Rand could burn somebody out of the pattern a full week back. That's using the Choedan Kal, etc. Because Asmodean died more than a week ago (it was something like 6 months ago in Randland time) then Graendal could not have been Asmo's killer.

Why does your final statement follow from he first?
Asmodean is out of reach of Rand's balefire. That means Graendal could have killed him, but the balefire won't being him back. That's all.
If it is true that Graendal died by balefire, then she did not kill Asmodean, end of story.

Very well, by that logic, Graendal never killed anyone, never erformed any atrocity, and was a honorable ascetic for all her life! What crap!
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 1644 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 626 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 692 Views
Yes, Brandon did. I edited my original message to add in another quote from Brandon...see above *NM* - 11/11/2009 05:33:27 PM 332 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 599 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 631 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 741 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 686 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 648 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 556 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 542 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 564 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 570 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 565 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 522 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 602 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 555 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 573 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 545 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 528 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 587 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 562 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 561 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 648 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 626 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 602 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 486 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 562 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 604 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 478 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 477 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 520 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 578 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 304 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 610 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 290 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 499 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 546 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 278 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 545 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 492 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 574 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 534 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 532 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 257 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 238 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 527 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 533 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 487 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 516 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 281 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 498 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 232 Views

Reply to Message