Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31981697-20170722123329/@comment-32182236-20171015134848

Except every "contradiction" I was able to resole, without contradicting evidence. By the way, everything within the game is evidence/facts. Turning them into jokes is just ignoring evidence, which is unscientific. After all, we can't we call the experimental results of the electron experiment a joke by God now, can we?

By the way, I did not deny that the dog represents Toby. Instead, I'm using causality and pretty much the concept of time as a whole to prove it represents 211X Toby. The room only proves a dog was here, and made a game by barking at a computer. The logo proves the dog didn't make Undertale this way. A simple resolution to this paradox is that the dog simply barked up a non-Undertale game. Done. Saying it IS Undertale contradicts clear evidence-The box, and saying there is no game contracts clear evidence:The computer, and... the box. But there's still the very real possibility that it's a separate game.

There IS a way to explain all the evidence, taking it literally like a scientist would. Do note that only the evidence must be taken this way, the characters could still be joking, but if they show knowledge of a subject, then they have said knowledge. (But if they SAY they do, and we have no proof they do, then maybe they do, maybe they don't-Occam's Razor means we should go with the option that they do until we find evidence they don't.) When it comes to the game's evidence, Don't. Ignore. Anything.