Active Users:1152 Time:23/11/2024 12:32:43 AM
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 1655 Views
He didn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:27:34 PM 633 Views
I definately did not see conclusive evidence; in fact... - 11/11/2009 05:32:20 PM 702 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 335 Views
That still doesn't say if she did or did not. - 11/11/2009 05:39:12 PM 612 Views
It eliminates for the following - 11/11/2009 05:44:29 PM 641 Views
That's quite a leap of logic... - 11/11/2009 06:31:21 PM 750 Views
Re: - 11/11/2009 07:46:15 PM 700 Views
You make a faulty assumption - 11/11/2009 08:06:52 PM 655 Views
NO! - 11/11/2009 09:07:39 PM 563 Views
Why? - 11/11/2009 06:32:10 PM 553 Views
Re: Why? - 11/11/2009 07:48:14 PM 570 Views
Logical? - 11/11/2009 09:16:18 PM 579 Views
Er? I think you're reading it wrong. - 11/11/2009 06:32:17 PM 572 Views
I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 06:33:41 PM 531 Views
Re: I can't follow your logic - 11/11/2009 07:47:27 PM 613 Views
I'm sorry but you are terribly wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:34:56 PM 564 Views
That is a fallacious leap of logic. - 11/11/2009 06:50:13 PM 580 Views
Yes, but... - 11/11/2009 07:49:39 PM 557 Views
That is still erroneous. - 11/11/2009 08:10:15 PM 534 Views
your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 05:47:53 PM 597 Views
Re: your interpretation is wrong - 11/11/2009 07:51:01 PM 571 Views
I repeat, your interpretation is wrong. - 11/11/2009 08:15:43 PM 568 Views
I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 06:11:46 PM 654 Views
Re: I generally agree... - 11/11/2009 08:01:31 PM 638 Views
I'm not a writer... - 11/11/2009 08:48:25 PM 609 Views
Agree - 18/11/2009 11:22:09 PM 494 Views
There's nothing in those quotes that even touches on who killed Asmodean. - 11/11/2009 06:40:31 PM 569 Views
This logic is lacking as well - 11/11/2009 10:17:48 PM 612 Views
Your comments make sense. - 11/11/2009 11:29:29 PM 485 Views
Re: Your comments make sense. - 12/11/2009 04:48:19 AM 484 Views
Two Things - 11/11/2009 07:58:11 PM 529 Views
Re: Sanderson eliminates a particular somebody from consideration as Asmodean's killer - 11/11/2009 07:59:32 PM 592 Views
But do you agree that Graendal cannot reveal herself if she got balefired? *NM* - 11/11/2009 08:07:53 PM 308 Views
Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 11/11/2009 08:52:49 PM 619 Views
this is what happens when you get interrupted in the middle of a post *NM* - 11/11/2009 09:28:01 PM 298 Views
What? Did you double post? - 11/11/2009 09:49:15 PM 506 Views
According to Etzel, this is impossible - 12/11/2009 04:14:47 AM 553 Views
Why is it impossible? You can't have parallel timelines? *NM* - 12/11/2009 11:29:45 AM 283 Views
I don't say it's impossible... - 12/11/2009 03:11:17 PM 554 Views
This was done in the series before... - 12/11/2009 03:40:58 PM 499 Views
I meant... - 12/11/2009 04:02:33 PM 584 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 18/11/2009 11:32:03 PM 541 Views
Re: Sure she can reveal herself! Even if she got Balefired! - 19/11/2009 01:57:48 AM 539 Views
that proved nothing. *NM* - 11/11/2009 10:46:15 PM 262 Views
Rather pointless, really. *NM* - 12/11/2009 01:08:14 AM 241 Views
Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:13:45 AM 543 Views
Re: Uh, I read the exact opposite - 12/11/2009 04:53:39 AM 538 Views
there was a bit more before it - 12/11/2009 05:03:20 AM 495 Views
Not so suspicious if he's read some fan reactions/theories. - 12/11/2009 11:48:30 AM 522 Views
Which he clearly said he did and LOL'd at. *NM* - 18/11/2009 11:33:58 PM 287 Views
Maybe I missed something. - 12/11/2009 03:02:59 PM 504 Views
Yeah, BS will reveal it either in ToM or AMoL. *NM* - 12/11/2009 03:12:16 PM 237 Views

Reply to Message