Active Users:463 Time:04/04/2025 10:38:56 PM
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. NaClH2O Send a noteboard - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM
The logic goes like this:

Graendal cannot reveal herself as Asmodean's killer directly (because she is balefired) or indirectly (by Asmodean reappearing).

Ergo, somebody else killed Asmodean, not Graendal.


First of all Graendal CAN reveal heself as Asmo's killer. We haven't SEEN Graendal reveal herself as Asmo's killer, that doesn't mean she hasn't. In fact since it is very very very likely that tGS and ToM run on parallel time lines for a while we may YET see Graendal reveal herself. On the other hand we may not. Just because I don't say something about B doesn't mean that I didn't do B. It just means you didn't hear me say "I did B".

NaCl(faulty reasoning all the way down the line)H2O
Reply to message
Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 05:18:48 PM 1737 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 709 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 783 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 370 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 697 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 722 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 832 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 788 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 734 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 620 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 634 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 654 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 652 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 662 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 619 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 701 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 645 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 660 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 642 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 621 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 680 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 652 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 658 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 743 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 691 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 699 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 617 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 657 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 693 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 558 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 556 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 611 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 670 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 343 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 690 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 330 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 588 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 638 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 321 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 645 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 578 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 671 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 615 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 622 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 299 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 279 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 632 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 623 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 576 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 607 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 323 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 587 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 272 Views

Reply to Message