Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31981697-20170722123329/@comment-32182236-20171014005543

Of COURSE every piece of evidence found must be consistent with all the others, either that. There has to be some way, some theory that can explain all of these. Otherwise, we don't have a world to theorize-We can come up with whatever wacky theories we want. Oh, maybe Sans IS Ness after all, and the fact that you can't transport physical matter was an example of such an inconsistency, instead of CLEAR proof that the theory is wrong!

Really, there has to be an explanation that takes into account ALL the evidence. Otherwise, there just isn't an answer to look for. Both everything and nothing is canon at the same time, in that case. While I do take certain interpretations of the evidence to do this, I don't flat-out contradict the evidence, and in these cases, it's either that, or there is no answer, because it's the only way to explain everything at once. That's basically the whole premise of Relativity-The implications of it completely seem to contradict what we perceive as normal, such as time passing at different speeds relative to different areas of space-But it never flat-out contradicts the evidence we have. I'm basically taking that route, in an attempt to have an explanation for every bit of evidence the game contains-With not a single piece definitively proving it wrong.

For example, we KNOW that a computer cannot be used before it even exists-Because it doesn't exist yet. This is clearly a contradiction, so we need an explanation of the evidence that doesn't lead to that contradiction. And it turns out the closest thing we have to evidence is that the dog made a game, with a logo similar to, but not identical, to Undertale's. So, we can accept the very simple explanation that the game in question is not Undertale. Done. In fact, saying it IS actually contradicts the evidence, because the logos aren't an exact match.

I can and have changed my theory to match the evidence before, but there has to still BE a theory. If combining all the evidence together leaves ZERO possible ways the story could have gone, then we analyzed something wrong there. Either that or there really IS no answer, and all of our theorizing was all to waste.