The 5 gods of Lovecraft

[groinkick]

And I don't think Nyarlathotep would like to be tied down at the Outer Gates so much.

Exactly.  If by some chance Gatekeeper was an Outsider, it would not be based on Nyarlathotep.  It's like saying Michael Myers was the inspiration for Harry Dresden.  Speaking of Michael Myers, here is the trailer for the new Halloween movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek1ePFp-nBI

[jonas]

A random wild guess that may or may not even fit the books is nothing like a scientific theory, sorry.

actually it fits to a tittle you may or may not ignore the pretext presented in the books and the little clues dropped but that doth not unmake them either.

Mother Winter and the Gatekeeper are rather clearly in the first line of defence against Outsiders. Now, they may be based on something from Outside crossing over, but much more likely seems that they are instead emergent features of reality; there is a reality and not-reality (Outside) and so they have to be separate. Something, or someone, has to stand on that line and maintain it - Winter and the Gatekeeper, at this time, as the prime champions of reality rather than Outside.

And I don't think Nyarlathotep would like to be tied down at the Outer Gates so much.

A shame basing things on sheer opinion does not a theory make or unmake then. Huh, I mean you've all repeatedly tried to bat something aside with that one phrase, "I don't think." Perhaps you should?
Cthulhu saves the world after all
Also emergent features of reality... even Outside reality is a feature of reality per human though of what is beyond reality. We have lovecraftian outsiders in our belief systems now, inexplicably perhaps, but if we believe in them we give them purchase, You can't close the gates you can only define them. Nothing can be considered Outside except as Lovecrafts original intention, that of things that do not, and cannot be fathomed by human minds without breaking... we fathom these outsiders of lovecrafts, we even apparently do rituals across the DFverse based on said creatures... So what precisely stops these creatures from manifesting left and right besides already having a formation inside reality to rep them? See, it's the tough questions you gotta ask yourself to think on them. That's why I take all comers on certain theorums, I've asked the right questions.
*also known outsiders have cosmic magic spells that can summon them, but they are outsiders then because?

[groinkick]

they are outsiders then because?

They aren't from our reality, and want to destroy it.  As Jim said "God created this sandbox, and locked the Outsiders out.  They can only enter if humans invite them in because it's our sandbox."

[Avernite]

actually it fits to a tittle you may or may not ignore the pretext presented in the books and the little clues dropped but that doth not unmake them either.
A shame basing things on sheer opinion does not a theory make or unmake then. Huh, I mean you've all repeatedly tried to bat something aside with that one phrase, "I don't think." Perhaps you should?

Well, I'm not the one claiming that I posit something equivalent to a sound scientific theory. As such my opinion is a fair enough argument, it just doesn't make my resulting pronouncement about the story a scientific theory.

Cthulhu saves the world after all
Also emergent features of reality... even Outside reality is a feature of reality per human though of what is beyond reality. We have lovecraftian outsiders in our belief systems now, inexplicably perhaps, but if we believe in them we give them purchase, You can't close the gates you can only define them. Nothing can be considered Outside except as Lovecrafts original intention, that of things that do not, and cannot be fathomed by human minds without breaking... we fathom these outsiders of lovecrafts, we even apparently do rituals across the DFverse based on said creatures... So what precisely stops these creatures from manifesting left and right besides already having a formation inside reality to rep them? See, it's the tough questions you gotta ask yourself to think on them. That's why I take all comers on certain theorums, I've asked the right questions.
*also known outsiders have cosmic magic spells that can summon them, but they are outsiders then because?

So far as we know it's precisely the Outer Gates and the Gatekeeper (backed by millions of Fae soldiers) that keep the creatures from manifesting left and right by stopping them at or outside the Gates. No guesswork about them having an agent on the inside necessary.

[jonas]

They aren't from our reality, and want to destroy it.  As Jim said "God created this sandbox, and locked the Outsiders out.  They can only enter if humans invite them in because it's our sandbox."

They've been invited in, repetitively. They are Outsiders because? Naagloshi are on par enough with Outsiders they are now to be contained by DR, except Originally they were a part of Reality. In fact, they were Angelic Beings.... who refused to move on. They didn't get locked out when some massive gate was originally closed on our sandbox. They were 'exorcised' later, and not by The Creator. See, this is the problem, lets look at what ya'll think Outsiders are because they are a shape that seems to conveniently fit whichever way would let you say a truth that does not directly address ANY of the larger situations or problems behind the current viewpoint. So by all means, Define precisely what an Outsider IS so I can proceed to rip the idea apart Cause I see a lot of assumptions in the above statement.... Just like me you speak without any attention to deductive lacuna even though you cannot prove all parts of your statement unconditionally. YOU believe it and so it comes across as your truth, just like mine.

[jonas]

Well, I'm not the one claiming that I posit something equivalent to a sound scientific theory. As such my opinion is a fair enough argument, it just doesn't make my resulting pronouncement about the story a scientific theory.

when did I use the word science? Are you doing science? NO? Still a sound deductive theorem and by all means I go more and more ammo for this one, just waiting in my subconscious mind to be retrieved by need... A theorem btw, is something that you can point back to as continual springboard into future cases of similar data patterns... I have a solid theorem. Made stronger by every person I have to debate on it, thanks duuude.

So far as we know it's precisely the Outer Gates and the Gatekeeper (backed by millions of Fae soldiers) that keep the creatures from manifesting left and right by stopping them at or outside the Gates. No guesswork about them having an agent on the inside necessary.

Thar's not the same thing, at all. It's not Fearbringer taking over Scarecrow by mirage, It's not Scarecrow saying He's been serving the Queen of Air and Darkness(Not the Winter Queen note) since before human memory, cause human memory would be what keeps him, or any being from Oblivion, except perhaps an outsider trying to get back in Mmm? SO there is unequivocal proof in HIS, a fae's wording, he cannot have lied, unless he was Nemfected, which would simply prove the other half of my theorem correct.

....every good point I make nobody ever concedes to, the simply move on to a new straw man to throw up when they can't 'win' the original points in contention. You can't examine the fallacy before your face!?
 To be my Last Laugh, BET
*Oh, just for giggles but you know Yeats Second Coming that's referenced repeatedly in the DF? It's in the Nyarlahotep Cycle, a compendium of works about or based on Nyarlahotep....

[Avernite]

when did I use the word science? Are you doing science? NO? Still a sound deductive theorem and by all means I go more and more ammo for this one, just waiting in my subconscious mind to be retrieved by need... A theorem btw, is something that you can point back to as continual springboard into future cases of similar data patterns... I have a solid theorem. Made stronger by every person I have to debate on it, thanks duuude.

At this point I suppose we must conclude you have no clue what a scientific theory is, and so the resulting argument would fit better outside this forum - it clearly isn't that you understand but have a trove of supporting data to support your assertion.

Thar's not the same thing, at all. It's not Fearbringer taking over Scarecrow by mirage, It's not Scarecrow saying He's been serving the Queen of Air and Darkness(Not the Winter Queen note) since before human memory, cause human memory would be what keeps him, or any being from Oblivion, except perhaps an outsider trying to get back in Mmm? SO there is unequivocal proof in HIS, a fae's wording, he cannot have lied, unless he was Nemfected, which would simply prove the other half of my theorem correct. ....every good point I make nobody ever concedes to, the simply move on to a new straw man to throw up when they can't 'win' the original points in contention. You can't examine the fallacy before your face!?
 To be my Last Laugh, BET
*Oh, just for giggles but you know Yeats Second Coming that's referenced repeatedly in the DF? It's in the Nyarlahotep Cycle, a compendium of works about or based on Nyarlahotep....

Or maybe Scarecrow is saying that current humans do not remember everything any human ever remembered - so that what he's saying is "I was there with the early humans, whom you puny people don't even remember".

[jonas]

At this point I suppose we must conclude you have no clue what a scientific theory is, and so the resulting argument would fit better outside this forum - it clearly isn't that you understand but have a trove of supporting data to support your assertion.

what? You sure your not attacking the person here? Getting in to dangerous territory with your inability to address the issues. attack the argument, not the person... if you even can Supporting data does tend to support, doesn't it lol?

Or maybe Scarecrow is saying that current humans do not remember everything any human ever remembered - so that what he's saying is "I was there with the early humans, whom you puny people don't even remember".

Since before human memory. Those early humans also remember things now forgotten to Oblivion, intentionally. This isn't even a rebuke to the idea.... your idea confirms he'd be amongst the Obliviated....
*oh and uhh...

Theorem= a general proposition not self-evident but proved by a chain of reasoning; a truth established by means of accepted truths.

yea. See my Truths made real by establishment of other Truths... that some tend to conveniently ignore. I propose a general perspective of the DFverse based on these principle truths that I can point to in book and woj evidence to support ;p

[Avernite]

what? You sure your not attacking the person here? Getting in to dangerous territory with your inability to address the issues. attack the argument, not the person... if you even can

I am attacking your abuse of the concept of a scientific theory, not the issues or you.

*oh and uhh... yea. See my Truths made real by establishment of other Truths... that some tend to conveniently ignore. I propose a general perspective of the DFverse based on these principle truths that I can point to in book and woj evidence to support ;p

And that is not at all like a scientific theory like the theory of evolution. They may have once started at a similar level, as a hypothesis grounded in data, but without predictions proven true (which we'd need more books for) your idea cannot proceed further.

Now, snipping back:

Supporting data does tend to support, doesn't it lol?Since before human memory. Those early humans also remember things now forgotten to Oblivion, intentionally. This isn't even a rebuke to the idea.... your idea confirms he'd be amongst the Obliviated....

Uhh, why? He has served since before humanity can remember, but at no point does he say there was a time humanity didn't know him. Just that current humanity doesn't remember that time.
Humanity in 2000 BC knew him, Humanity in 1 AD knew him, Humanity in 2000 AD knew him, but Humanity in 2000 AD doesn't remember 2000 BC (mix and match dates as needed).

[jonas]

I am attacking your abuse of the concept of a scientific theory, not the issues or you.And that is not at all like a scientific theory like the theory of evolution. They may have once started at a similar level, as a hypothesis grounded in data, but without predictions proven true (which we'd need more books for) your idea cannot proceed further.

Actually smarty pants, Prove Gravity exists... you can't, it's still a theory. You can see the visible results from it, you can deduct the results of it's influence but you can't prove gravity exists because you can't visibly produce it(and before you wanna argue me on this, go argue the science guy on Tedtalks whose speech i'm ripping off instead, thanks)
on to the cutting at my edges and ad hominem things...

attacking your abuse of the concept of a scientific theory

But I didn't say scientific, this isn't science it's reading comprehension. So saying i'm abusing scientific theory's is actually just to try to insult me(cut those edges you it's gonna be hard for you to use reverse psychology on someone who enjoys psychology after all)

you have no clue

that's ad hominem, and false, as I've proved already, but you insist on troping the same argument thinking it matters...

isn't that you understand but have a trove of supporting data to support your assertion.

this statement is simply asinine of itself here.

A random wild guess that may or may not even fit the books is nothing like a scientific theory, sorry.

Random wild guesses cannot, by their nature, be supported by a trove of date, your sorry feels similar to someone saying,"I don't mean to be rude, BUT." I'm actually going to be and this is my excuse me lately. Simply meant to cut again...

Now, snipping back:

See, and that's your assumption, AND your admission of self guilt, it's your intention. I'm simply defending my position.... successfully I might add

Uhh, why? He has served since before humanity can remember, but at no point does he say there was a time humanity didn't know him. Just that current humanity doesn't remember that time.

You do know how the Oblivion war works right? If humanity forgot him there would be a disassociation between him, and the him who is remembered. Which is why, for instance, Mab had the brothers Grimm reassert their prime identity by distributing knowledge on them.

Humanity in 2000 BC knew him, Humanity in 1 AD knew him, Humanity in 2000 AD knew him, but Humanity in 2000 AD doesn't remember 2000 BC (mix and match dates as needed).

That's Oblivion then ain't it... If here and know they don't remember whom he was then, then he's not that person anymore.
Now, quite apart from my ability to theorize, if your going to attempt to bother me on a personal level you'll need to bring a lot more game to the table...

[Avernite]

Actually smarty pants, Prove Gravity exists... you can't, it's still a theory. You can see the visible results from it, you can deduct the results of it's influence but you can't prove gravity exists because you can't visibly produce it(and before you wanna argue me on this, go argue the science guy on Tedtalks whose speech i'm ripping off instead, thanks)
 

So you really don't understand the difference between the science word theory and the book-discussion word theory.

Gravity being proven has nothing to do with anything. The Theory of Gravity having predictive power is what makes it a scientific theory; your theory which has succesfully predicted nothing cannot be a scientific theory (it could be a scientific hypothesis if it predicted something which had not yet come to pass).

on to the cutting at my edges and ad hominem things...
But I didn't say scientific, this isn't science it's reading comprehension. So saying i'm abusing scientific theory's is actually just to try to insult me(cut those edges you it's gonna be hard for you to use reverse psychology on someone who enjoys psychology after all)

You are abusing it by saying "It's a theory, just like evolution.". It is not. It is a theory by the book-discussion standard (some idea which you have based on book snippets and some extrapolation), but not a theory by scientific standards (what evolution is, because your theory has not provided any predictions that could be falsified and then were not because they seem to be true)

You do know how the Oblivion war works right? If humanity forgot him there would be a disassociation between him, and the him who is remembered. Which is why, for instance, Mab had the brothers Grimm reassert their prime identity by distributing knowledge on them.

Say I remember five years ago today, but no longer remember 30 years ago. This does not necessarily mean there is any single day where I didn't remember myself; it simply means that my remembrance is shifting in time.

To remember Mab and stop her from going to Oblivion, you don't need to remember she was around in the year 1000. You just need to know she exists right now.

That's Oblivion then ain't it... If here and know they don't remember whom he was then, then he's not that person anymore.
Now, quite apart from my ability to theorize, if your going to attempt to bother me on a personal level you'll need to bring a lot more game to the table...

Oblivion isn't "the creature is no longer the exact same as 1000 years ago". I no longer remember who I was 30 years ago, and I am not the same, but I'm still the same being/creature/human.

[jonas]

So you really don't understand the difference between the science word theory and the book-discussion word theory.

Gravity being proven has nothing to do with anything. The Theory of Gravity having predictive power is what makes it a scientific theory; your theory which has succesfully predicted nothing cannot be a scientific theory (it could be a scientific hypothesis if it predicted something which had not yet come to pass).

You should probably read the new Q n A post from mothers day, where Jim outright says that Rashid was the previous Harry Dresden in the last cycle. Implying he WAS in fact the Warden, ergo his formation just got some merit, ergo a prediction. Or we could simply look at the fact he specifically used the word cycle and my over theory has to do with how time/history is repeating itself due to the gyre mentioned in Yeat's second coming which has then been referenced throughout the books. So I predicted the fact there WAS a cycle at all... I think I'm done here

The Q&A was posted mere hours ago, but seems to have been shot on Mother's day.  I can't tell if the Label of it being 2017 is correct. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnIZcNMU_uM

The only Holy Shizz stuff for me was the heavy insinuation (he doesn't quite come right out and say it being Jim) that Rashid was the previous Warden of Demonreach. 

There was also mention of Lucifer being a character, and another rundown of the Maggie Dresdenverse Hogwarts YA series co-written with his sister.

Ohhh snaps, my theory just became viable by your own argument, huh? Thanks again