And the Precursors re-evolved Humanity, paying off the Chekhov’s Gun set up earlier in the story. I didn’t bring it up because that’s an even longer argument than the connection between Humans and the Forerunners, and when you’re so stubbornly placing anonymous-third-party summaries in higher esteem than the novels on one subject, there’s no reason to assume you’d be any more rational on the others.
Have you never read a mystery book before? The search for the clues is a big part of the draw of the story. Think about how terrible a murder-mystery series would be if the murderer confessed at the start of the story and volunteered all of the evidence and motives.
That hypothesis is given in contrast to the Lord of Admiral’s hypothesis, and introduces the lost history that combines with other lore to form a coherent narrative that fits all of the information, not just a tiny piece you found on a wiki.
So where is your proof? lol Still you haven’t provided ANY proof other than “go read the books” which sounds a lot like “go google it.”
You’ve been trying to belittle me instead of inform me on anything valid to the argument. I haven’t said you are wrong nor accepted what you have said, yet you’re somehow saying I’m incorrect even though I am telling you known information that is posted online for all to see…
I really don’t understand how you’re upset about this? I can’t find any evidence of what you’re trying to say, it’s purely a vaguely hinted background theory. And I provided evidence while you shot me down saying Wikis are inferior to the mighty books.
What a waste of time.
1 Like
You’re belittling the canonical sources for the information you’re trying to argue about, and you’re blindly placing all of your faith on tertiary sources compiled by anonymous people who are anything but official. Asking you to at least read the books so you have a chance of understanding what I have to say is not the same thing as your calls to “go google it” which exemplifies your complete aversion to any gain of depth of knowledge. Arguing under those conditions is patently absurd.
I want to have a legitimate discussion, but you’ve made that impossible by refusing to take the time to actually understand what you’re talking about.
It’s the Dunning Kruger Effect. You’re at the point where you know very little, but you think you know it all, and are consequently not open to any information that would get you past that stage.
1 Like
Bro hold the fudge up. I am telling sourced information to you that is available for all people to see and interpret any way they see fit. Unfortunately, I can’t find ANY information or solid facts that prove your theory… AND that is all I was trying to say… where is the proof?
I admit when I am wrong dude, lol I did it in the last thread when I was incorrect about something before you pulled this discussion into a brand new thread for some strange reason…
I enjoy knowledge and would love to know the clues and hints behind your theory, but you instead are belittling me when you should have been informing me.
1 Like
I’m telling you, that if you read the books, you’d have the basic breadth of knowledge to be able to understand the details you missed as I explain them to you. But since you blatantly refuse to read the books, you lack the ability to understand, because you don’t have the context.
A wiki is a summary, and it’s only as good as the person/people who wrote it, meaning their accuracy is limited by the interpretations of the editors, making them an inferior, tertiary source compared to the primary sources, which in this case, are the novels. A difference can be both subtle and significant, like the difference between the words “desert” and “dessert”. That’s why you need to check the sources to see if they actually say what the articles claim they say, and not just believe the articles blindly because they have “a source”. Schools used to teach this, and it makes me sad that they no longer do, because it results in encounters like this.
1 Like
Oh… ok so no proof then, or evidence just gonna take Chakas biased opinions to heart huh… more unwarranted accusations against me for using information that is backed with sourced material hmm okay lol
Now, I am going to FINALLY tell you my opinion on the matter even though it’s pointless… Humans and Forerunners might have a similar base DNA because they came from the same neural stock the Precursors had but they are evolved completely different from one another which means they were never the same species just similar… which is why the Librarian could modify the humans secretly over millennia to eventually adapt to become Reclaimers of Forerunner tech. To enact the Precursor’s true wishes and undo the Forerunner’s mistakes.
I deleted post wtf?
But both of you are being pretty childish here guys please stop.
1 Like
It’s over with. I’m ashamed I even gave this argument any light to begin with. I knew once he started a new thread he was going off the deep end to try and prove his opinion as a fact. He even went far to try and insult my education which he has no clue what he’s talking about lmao it also speaks volumes about his character in person.
To re-iterate my point:
There is no evidence that proves Humanity and Forerunners were the same species. Only select dialog between biased characters who vaguely suggest they could be the same species. They only have similar base DNA codes because they came from the same neural material the Precursors used to create sentient life in the first place.
But there is in fact, sourced evidence from Halo: Primordium , pages 237-238 that state the opposite of his theory, humanity came from Earth. I provided proof and tried to get valid reasons for his views, and all he wanted to do is hurl insults like a child and run from any sort of meaningful discussion.