That's not the point. Bottomline is, after Zamasu and Black killed all the humans, they would leave the Earth there. They liked the planet and even set up a cottage there.
that's obviously black's descion due to his host's attachment to that world but it's only temporary like a hunting cabin. they would have blown up the earth in the end and replace with something else in their image.
The scene with Black looking over the ruined city, repenting the destruction he caused, and his promise that it would soon become a better utopia, suggests otherwise.
How exactly would they replace it with something else?
How exactly would they replace it with something else?
It's a sadistic trait. enhanced. that kind of thinking is what makes them more dangerous the reason they believe that it's dirtified is because of the humans not them. they blame them especially trunks.
they're gods of creation its in their name. if porunga can rebuild a planet they can.
and the point of the zero mortal plan is to remove all traces of life in the living universe which includes the planets and the stars as well. the creation of the other gods that the zamasu's murdered and since zeno obliterated the existance of that multiverse zamasu actually won. i'm not the only one who thinks this.
There's no evidence to suggest they would blow up the planet before they became Merged Zamasu though. What you're saying is speculation that may or may not be true.
I guess. Though they don't create the planet directly like the Dragon Gods, they set up the right conditions for a planet to be born. Knowing Zamasu, I'm not sure he has that kind of patience.
"planets" and "stars" don't count as "mortal", just saying.
That's a different scenario. But honestly I'd agree with that last part. Zamasu did win. He destroyed everyone and everything, even before Zeno showed up.
I guess. Though they don't create the planet directly like the Dragon Gods, they set up the right conditions for a planet to be born. Knowing Zamasu, I'm not sure he has that kind of patience.
"planets" and "stars" don't count as "mortal", just saying.
That's a different scenario. But honestly I'd agree with that last part. Zamasu did win. He destroyed everyone and everything, even before Zeno showed up.
we've seen gods of destructions do their jobs but not their opposite counterparts. all they do is talk and drink tea.
there actually is evidence. a lot
planet and stars do count it's in the living relm and it's to be destroyed and replaced.
We have seen Kaioshins do their jobs. You forgetting our Kaioshin going to great lengths to stop Majin Buu?
Well no proof then. Only some "maybes"
If you listen to half of Zamasu's speeches, he said he wants the universe to be perfect by freeing it of mortals, not the non-living things that the mortals live on/with.
How is it that you always manage to come up with a belief that defies the majority?
0551E80Y wrote:
(...)you are on the losing side of an arguement as i have, can and will always counter the points you and anyone else brings up. you start resorting to attacking me directly rather then my arguements aka ad hominem
here's facts about me directly. I'm as smart as sheldon cooper from big bang theory. that you can have a fact. i also put in why i think the way i do. take a read at it., there are no secrets about me it's staring at you. one more is that my mother has a masters degree in psychology which she earned just after i was born.she taught me as i grew up knowing how people think in any situation.
Issue is, in all the recent arguments that came up, you never countered another person's argument. Literally never. Not a single time has there been a third party that decided they were convinced by you, and in fact, most of the time a lot of people disagree with you.
You see, when a majority of people seem to be in agreement over a point you find yourself disagreeing with, usually one of the three situations is the case : Either
a) There's serious ambigousness about a situation or a concept, rendering it possible neither opinion is true over another - this is a very common case in interpretation of entertainment media, though much rarely so in simple entertainment like Dragon Ball
b) A number of people are being indoctrinated strongly and will always believe something to be the case even if evidence points against it. Unless we assume you are the indoctrinated party, this doesn't really apply here - there's no Dragon Ball sect that interprets events for us nor even a bad Funimation dub that makes people believe SSJ3 Buu Saga Goku > Everything in Buu Saga.
c) IT'S ACTUALLY VALID TO LISTEN TO THEIR POINT AND YOU MIGHT BE WRONG.
Issue with discussing with you and the reason people believe you're either arrogant or unwilling to listen to reason is because all your discussion basically consist of you assuming a scenario, drawing a path to that scenario based on archetypes you are familiar with, then assuming this scenario is true because you could draw such a pattern. You don't discuss other's points or even your own, you stubbornly state these archetypes or connections you've found and decided to accept as true and push them forward as an argument.
Black and Zamasu created the Zero Mortals plan. Not 'new universe' plan, literally the Zero Mortals plan. Let us remember one thing : Zamasu is not a Kaioshin when he becomes Goku Black, he's a Kaioshin/Supreme Kai *in training*. He is not a God of Creation (which is the role Kaioshins have) and presumably doesn't know a whole lot about creating stuff.In terms of the Shin-Jin's race lifespan, Future Zamasu is only very marginally older than Present Zamasu. Two important things are to be made here : That apparently prior to murdering Gowasu neither Zamasu achieved the state of a true God of Creation, and are thus technically still apprentices, and that Gods of Creation apparently require the counterweight in the form of Gods of Destruction to actually follow up with the creation of stuff. Zamasu killed all deities in all universes in Future Trunks' timeline other than Zeno and whoever resided with Zeno potentially. Even if Zamasu had creative powers, them being able to create a number of universes or freely recreate planets is merely an assumption of yours. It's the argument I'm least against because in theory Gods of Destruction can allow other people to carry out said destruction. However, Zamasu is clearly still an apprentice, since unlike Gowasu he is unable to predict that Potara fusing a mortal and an immortal won't let him retain stable immortality.It also fits in his personality of considering himself the most worthy of godhood without having much to back it up that he earned with his own effort.
Both Zamasu and Goku Black are immense combat pragmatists, more so than any characters we've seen other than Frost and perhaps Freeza. Black knew he could gain more from fighting Goku than fighting Vegeta, so he lures Vegeta in and stabs him, not wanting to deal with both of them at once. When Black returns to the past, he not only happily engages Goku specifically because he can gain more from fighting Goku than eliminating Trunks, but also destroys the time machine.His monologue immediately afterwards suggests he believes Trunks is stuck in the past permanently too.
It fits in with his character, too, not letting Trunks return to the future and commit more 'sins', and is strategically viable. He has no guarantee Trunks will be able to return, so the 'hunt' you claim he was after is potentially over, but it doesn't matter to Black, because he removed a small obstacle while getting what he wanted from Goku thus helping the plan unveil fully when he adapted more to Goku's body. He gave up on hunting Trunks because it was more beneficial to do so and even didn't care about battling Goku when he believed he sufficiently absorbed Goku's fighting style and powers. That part of argument strongly opposes your theory on Black always holding enjoyment of fighting over his pragmatism.
Now, the point I really wanted to make is that incredibly battle-pragmatic duo of Zamasu and Black, where Zamasu was willing to allow his body to be pummeled, pierced, and blasted, and Black immediately eliminated opponents and situations he believed wouldn't benefit him significantly... What do they do when they are overwhelmed?
When Black gets pushed back by Vegeta, not once does he consider blowing up the planet and having Saiyans suffocate in space. In fact, he prefers *tearing a hole in space with a power he admits he doesn't know the effects of* over doing that. When Black and Zamasu fuse, not once do they unleash an attack meant to destroy the planet, neither when their victory seems clear, nor when they are being beaten up by Vegito. They focus on killing mortals and killing mortals alone. When Zamasu's body is obliterated, all he does is *still* kill mortals, even though he covers the whole planet and could destroy it with a single blast, from any direction, given that all three of the Saiyans together were only able to stop a narrow part of the barrage.
Zamasu doesn't do that, either.
For all of their hypocrisy and a certain naivete in terms of their own capability and the right of gods to judge mortals, the reason why people believe Black and Zamasu were only after the mortal races and didn't intend to destroy the universes or even just the planets and stars within is because they remarkably stick to that particular course of action no matter how much they dominate or are pushed back in any given situation. Furthermore, if you look at the wide scope of the Dragon Ball Universe, it makes *perfect* sense. That version of the timeline has no gods except for Zamasu, but Zamasu does intend to allow gods to live in his new world. How? Because Shin-jin do not apparently reproduce biologically, instead coming from ripened fruits of trees on their home planets. Zamasu has the time to eradicate mortals, wait for new Shin-jins to grow, then raise them as he sees fit on planets that are now devoid of sapient mortal life and belong once more to the gods.
Bravo venithil bravo. finally someone actually managed to stand up to me and give me a challenge. i've been waiting for something like this for a loong time. but alas let me break it down as you have. (you must have been at this for hours) i've sensed that you've reached a boiling point. so i suggest after this for your sake you take a break.
'Issue is, in all the recent arguments that came up, you never countered another person's argument. Literally never. Not a single time has there been a third party that decided they were convinced by you, and in fact, most of the time a lot of people disagree with you.'
i've countered a lot of arguements and the signs of me that won are. a) you suddenly leave when you feel you can't discuss anymore b) start resorting to attack me directly such as saying i'm impossible to reason with or a lost cause aka ad hominem like 10 times said 'I find that resorting to personal attacks is a sign that evidence has failed a user in a discussion and you've resorted to attacking people instead of ideas.'
and he's right. an ad hominem is clearly a personal attack even if it's super light once i see one i end the arguement then and there cos it has stooped to a level that has become uncivil and i will not tolerate it. i may be rash but i try to stay civil.
c) my most favourite is it becomes a flame war and reduced to using semantics of finding weaknesses in my arguements and when that happens i just replace it with 10 more i have in spare. due to the nature of db it's very easy.
'You see, when a majority of people seem to be in agreement over a point you find yourself disagreeing with, usually one of the three situations is the case : Either
a) There's serious ambigousness about a situation or a concept, rendering it possible neither opinion is true over another - this is a very common case in interpretation of entertainment media, though much rarely so in simple entertainment like Dragon Ball
b) A number of people are being indoctrinated strongly and will always believe something to be the case even if evidence points against it. Unless we assume you are the indoctrinated party, this doesn't really apply here - there's no Dragon Ball sect that interprets events for us nor even a bad Funimation dub that makes people believe SSJ3 Buu Saga Goku > Everything in Buu Saga.
c) IT'S ACTUALLY VALID TO LISTEN TO THEIR POINT AND YOU MIGHT BE WRONG.'
for your answer it's B. it's mostly B. a happens as well but not as much. i see it all the damn time everywhere i was reading. and it's 100% NEVER C. as everytime someone brings up something that's valid something else comes along and knocks it out of the park. it happened to me recently as i strongly believed that vegito would never return but not only was proved wrong, it came with a curve ball. HE IS NO LONGER A PERMANENT FUSION! DDD8<
Issue with discussing with you and the reason people believe you're either arrogant or unwilling to listen to reason is because all your discussion basically consist of you assuming a scenario, drawing a path to that scenario based on archetypes you are familiar with, then assuming this scenario is true because you could draw such a pattern.
You don't discuss other's points or even your own, you stubbornly state these archetypes or connections you've found and decided to accept as true and push them forward as an argument.
'Correct it's true i do that because 9/10 it always happens like that i reached that thinking and arguement through years and years of predicting and watching as i got better. and fyi those archtypes and my points are one and the same. for some such as the gap i even declared that my points also states the gap makes anything related to the two series that is pointed out not a factor due to the gap and the unknown that hasn't happened yet in the show.
this is the the gaps true purpose so pay attention. it's not, to disprove/aprove gt's existance it's not about what happens in it. it's not even suppose to have an arguement
it's supposed to have people realise that in the long terms of things dragon ball super is presumed to have a healthy long life due to it being created and run by the same people as z rather then gt. as z had a long life of 7 years. 1989-1996 so it will go on for years in end.
10 years for goku to have adventures, 10 years to see new things and meet new life 10 years for any refference to gt to happen. SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF FRETTING ABOUT THIS NOW! toei is not going to make any jump to a gt refference in super disproving/aproving it's existance anytime soon. so people should stop thinking about gt in their minds when watching super and just enjoy it for what it is.
But if you want my true honest opinion about's what coming in the gap. here i believe that super is in fact the final story for dragon ball franchise not gt. the dc comic that rebooted the entire dc franchise. 'crisis on infinite earths' is going to happen in dragon ball. with characters introduced into super that have the power to erase reality. like the last saga was focusing on. this can easily happen.
then everything just resets back to age 737 with a new story line of goku going to earth. however his purpose could change. and the story of dragon ball has a new plot but with the core of it is gathering the dragon balls and if akira could have tighter montioring on what he writes in and if he even bothers to write notes about important details he puts in his story to counter his memory problem there wouldn't be an incositincy.
why this needs to happen is the answer to your questions about me and my thinking. the dragon ball franchise... is a mess. it is exactly where dc comics was in 1985 before the crisis story was made. it has no structure, it's always incositent it has done things over and over that the fans don't like, such as gt. and needs to be bulldozed down and started again.
it's big enough, and culturaly successfull enough to survive doing this.
and personally i have kept a lot of anger about dragon ball fans locked away for many years myself all the years of listening and hearing people bemoaning and moaning about gt, powerlevels and superman have caused me to have sociopathic tendacies from it all.
the anger at me is parralell to the anger at this wiki and its stance by the larger community. which to be fair i have NO contribution in.
and one more thing Venhitil i am quite disappointed that you haven't looked at why i am the way i am. everything you have pointed out about me are the exact traits my mental thinking has which i have linked and i will link it again.
it also explains the response to others and the occurence that it appears which is rarely evidence of it obviously is no one has come that has the same or similar type. it's all valid. not only that but it also has a link for you try it yourself.
you know guys how about i give you something that you want. as i have other things to priotise that needs my attention such as education and life. i won't be on the discussion threads until uni is over. also with sun and moon out i need to focus on that. so as favour to you guys you won't hear from me for a while.