Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline (Part 3)

[Starvel]

"Correct" response, which you admitted could be wrong.

I am reading/listening to everything you have said. I just disagree with you.

There are a couple of opinions on this topic and I think all ARE valid. It is YOU who keeps saying I'm wrong because I just refuse to be bullied into agreeing with you!

Anything in fiction can be wrong. It's fiction, things change. It's not incorrect to say people don't know who Peter Parker is right now just because that can change later. It's not incorrect to say when that scene takes place because we have an official answer just because some new information can come along. You act like this is set in stone and the fact retcons happen is some kinda "gotcha". It isn't. That's the nature of making a fictional timeline for a fictional universe that's ever evolving.

I've never said you HAVE to agree with me, I've said multiple times you can think whatever the fuck you want with your own timeline. I've only said as long as I waste my time editing this timeline Dallas Kinard does not get to supersede an official source when he comes to me with two trees of evidence. You have continued to make this this timelines problem despite being told Multiple times to you're considered wrong here and that's that. You don't have to agree, you do have to accept this isn't changing today or any day until you get something new to add to your argument

 

[Dallas Kinard]

You know for someone who's made up their mind, you sure do like to argue.

Please. As if nobody else on here has been arguing for hours over a fictional universe. Debate is GOOD. It's how we wrestle with the truth and get closer to it.

 

[selfishmisery]

Let it go. It's not a big deal.

This will get admins involved if it keeps up, I imagine.

 

[Starvel]

You know for someone who's made up their mind, you sure do like to reply.

That's what I'm sayin lol

 

[Dallas Kinard]

Anything in fiction can be wrong. It's fiction, things change. It's not incorrect to say people don't know who Peter Parker is right now just because that can change later. It's not incorrect to say when that scene takes place because we have an official answer just because some new information can come along. You act like this is set in stone and the fact retcons happen is some kinda "gotcha". It isn't. That's the nature of making a fictional timeline for a fictional universe that's ever evolving.

I've never said you HAVE to agree with me, I've said multiple times you can think whatever the fuck you want with your own timeline. I've only said as long as I waste my time editing this timeline Dallas Kinard does not get to supersede an official source when he comes to me with two trees of evidence. You have continued to make this this timelines problem despite being told Multiple times to you're considered wrong here and that's that. You don't have to agree, you do have to accept this isn't changing today or any day until you get something new to add to your argument

Cool story bro. I never once made the claim that anyone HAS to agree with me. I'm simply giving people something to consider. I don't care if you don't find the evidence compelling, but it exists either way. Leave it up to the viewer to decide what they choose to believe. It's all fiction anyway lol

 

[Dallas Kinard]

Let it go. It's not a big deal.

This will get admins involved if it keeps up, I imagine.

Oh let's call the authorities to come and police our disagreements over a fictional universe! What a joke lol

 

[Starvel]

Cool story bro. I never once made the claim that anyone HAS to agree with me.

I didn't say you did

I'm simply giving people something to consider. I don't care if you don't find the evidence compelling, but it exists either way. Leave it up to the viewer to decide what they choose to believe. It's all fiction anyway lol

I just said you've said this over and over and over. We get it. Drop it.

 

[SoyaCS]

Cool story bro. I never once made the claim that anyone HAS to agree with me. I'm simply giving people something to consider. I don't care if you don't find the evidence compelling, but it exists either way. Leave it up to the viewer to decide what they choose to believe. It's all fiction anyway lol

I have a hunch you didn't actually read all of what they said. Oh well, wrestling with the truth can be difficult for some people.

 

[selfishmisery]

Oh let's call the authorities to come and police our disagreements over a fictional universe! What a joke lol

Not the authorities.
@Blackbeard

I won't have this squabble continue.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

I have a hunch you didn't actually read all of what they said. Oh well, wrestling with the truth can be difficult for some people.

Actually I did. "Anything in fiction can be wrong. It's fiction, things change." This right here literally means debate over. The book could be wrong. The movie could be wrong. Both could be wrong! It's FICTION!!

 

[SoyaCS]

Oh let's call the authorities to come and police our disagreements over a fictional universe! What a joke lol

No need to be rude to them, they weren't arguing with you. They were just giving a warning.

 

[Starvel]

Actually I did. "Anything in fiction can be wrong. It's fiction, things change." This right here literally means debate over. The book could be wrong. The movie could be wrong. Both could be wrong! It's FICTION!!

Yes. And until something is proven wrong this site will go with the official timeline source. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, you do have to accept it.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

Not the authorities.
@Blackbeard

I won't have this squabble continue.

How dare we disagree on a fictional thing. How dare we!

 

[Dallas Kinard]

Yes. And until something is proven wrong this site will go with the official timeline source.

I think it HAS been proven wrong by on-screen evidence though. So the debate continues....

 

[Dallas Kinard]

No need to be rude to them, they weren't arguing with you. They were just giving a warning.

A silly warning at that lol

 

[SoyaCS]

How dare we disagree on a fictional thing. How dare we!

Why are you trying to start conflicts...?

 

[Dallas Kinard]

Why are you trying to start conflicts...?

Oh brother. I'm not SoyaCS. I'm sharing an opinion and then a bunch of people got mad that I shared it and dared to question their authority. How long have you been using the internet?

 

[Starvel]

I think it HAS been proven wrong by on-screen evidence though. So the debate continues....

On-screen evidence was before the timeline book which gave a specific timeline placement for the scene. As you said if everything can be wrong then we take all the evidence see what lines up. The trees can line up with the book, then that's the placement. Sure the trees can say something else but the timeline books disagrees so that's not the placement. Until you get something new debate is done. You seem to be confusing a debate continuing as just saying the same thing over and over as a debate.

 

[Dallas Kinard]

On-screen evidence was before the timeline book which gave a specific timeline placement for the scene. As you said if everything can be wrong then we take all the evidence see what lines up. The trees can line up with the book, then that's the placement. Sure the trees can say something else but the timeline books disagrees so that's not the placement. Until you get something new debate is done. You seem to be confusing a debate continuing as just saying the same thing over and over as a debate.

So recency determines placement? So if a tie-in book came out tomorrow that placed that scene a year later, is that what you'd go with? Recent = fact?

 

[Starvel]

So recency determines placement? So if a tie-in book came out tomorrow that placed that scene a year later, is that what you'd go with? Recent = fact?

Recency + all evidence working together. Your evidence is trees. As stated the trees work with the book. There's your placement. I can't say it any simpler than this. I get that this is clearly a difficult concept for you to grasp. But all you've brought us is "I *think* the trees could mean a different placement". Cool story, the trees agree with the official placement. Have you brought us anything new besides "well I think I'm more correct that the official book"? No? Okay great get some new evidence or a different argument and come back. Then it might be an actual debate and not just you saying the same thing repeatedly like something has changed this time.