Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31981697-20170722123329/@comment-32182236-20171019213759

You're right- it's not 201X Toby. It's 211X Toby. The year Undertale happens in. Frisk entered the room, so the 211X part must be true. Frisk did not exist in 201X, or in the 2010's. Also, I only said it doesn't foreshow anything relative to the game world-The future tense is never used. However, anything that happened before 211X wouldn't be "foreshadowed", because it would have happened in the past. Hence, any game made between now and 211X could be the game. Of course, like I said earlier, it's also an AU Toby, because IRL Toby's not a dog, and probably doesn't go around stealing bones.

Though I still took them into consideration, and didn't actually contradict the evidence/facts. Ignoring evidence is considered cherrypicking, however. We can't cherrypick.

Actually, yes, we DO need confirmation, within the game, for it to be considered fact instead of fanon. Determination being a red SOUL trait is what the fandom belives in, yet THAT'S not considered a fact-Same thing here. All we have are vague similarities, the trailer, and Toby's tweets-Said tweets are non-canon-He said so himself in a tweet, just as reliable as his others-If they WERE canon, that would include the tweet that said they weren't-Hence, they aren't canon. As for the trailer, it shows Frisk walking through walls because there's no collision... Frisk walked through the walls, so it must be after they fell, but at the same time, it must be before they fell, since collision wasn't there, and Papyrus thinks he could be the mom, when this is clearly not true, proven during the events of the game. Therefore, a paradox is created, and the trailer can't be considered canon. (It wasn't the actual game anyway)

"since in this particular case, the weird mushroom will never be explained, unlike in real life, where contradicting facts often do get explained, or turn the situation around (when it is found they are linked to more evidence for example). Not the case here, unfortunately"

Actually, I reason that this IS the case-That it IS like real life here, and we must analyze it as such. The rules of logic never change.