Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-32182236-20190721003717/@comment-27136653-20190807235605

"As I said time and time again, all that matters is the claim itself, not the person making the claim. I'm just debunking the idea that Toby Fox is literally infallible, and since he said something, we should say that it's true!"

He is infallible, you just need to tune your autism down to be able to distill the truth from the jokes like every other normal person. And I have no idea how else to convey this so pardon the language.

"The person making the claim is usually the one with the burden of proof."

So you're just gonna assume that Toby doesn't know his own game. Excellent.

"We can't read his mind, and Toby Fox is not God. So deducing his meaning is an impossible feat."

So is reconstructing Undertale's world from what is currently available to us, as you've previously fantasized. So I do not understand your argument. The absolute nature of something, as I said, is impossible to know without being able to test it. And we can't test run copies of Undertale and hope they would somehow turn out differently. We can only make probabilistic assessments. And when the author says something and it doesn't seem like a joke and they haven't lost their credibility yet... it's pretty darn probable that their word is the truth. To me, Toby hasn't lost his credibility because at no point I felt like he was trolling. I was always able to tell the truth away from the jokes. I don't know what made you lose his faith in him.

"Not anything. Only things that fit with what the game gives us."

Of course, that's what I meant, duh.