Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26006155-20190617222636/@comment-26006155-20190701040458

My point is that I try to find theories that fit ALL the evidence.

Including the strange and non-obvious clues the artists have left, whose purpose isn't immediately obvious.

In a mystery, the best-hidden items are usually the most important. Because they were the details the artist hid the most carefully, knowing they were important.

This is why I shake my head when you point to things like two men running Freddy's, and unilaterally declare that "this is a pile of rocks that means nothing".

You frequently take details that don't mesh with your current theories, and banish them. And ridicule theorists who do consider such details important, no matter what they find using them.

You constantly accuse me of not using evidence in my theories.. because it's evidence that you have declared Irrelevant. A self-fullfilling prophecy on your part that has nothing to do with deductive reasoning.

And after banishing essential evidence to solving the story, you then declare that *YOU* are the avatar of science and logical thought in the room.

Even as you dismiss Albert Einstein as a fool, because he once got something wrong.

The irony wears at me.

As it always does whenever I have to correct you on a lore detail. Over, and over again.

You seem to think it's impossible for anyone with any sort of beliefs to also be a successful scientist. Even with the example of Albert Einstein before you as the most famous scientist in the world.

Perhaps you should revise some of your own theories, based on the evidence?