Ok, a lot of stuff in your last post here is either irrelevant to the discussion or all come under the same point, so I won't specifically answer quote by quote this time. This is not because I do not feel capable of answering all your arguments and statements because you've "painted me into a corner" (this could probably go on indefinitely if I answered every statement), but because a lot of stuff is simply irrelevant, and bringing us away from the real point here. I hope you understand, and if there's anything you really WANT me to answer specifically, please do let me know. Now, to answer the relevant stuff.
1)
You are correct, and I have agreed, that there is no absolute, 100% definite knowledge of what will happen after the game has ended. How then can I claim that with the certainty I do that Rinoa is not Ultimecia? Surely, since we don't know for sure, anything could have happened, including Rinoa becoming Ultimecia. You regard this as hypocrisy on my part, which I assume is either because you didn't care to read my last post carefully (a crime I willingly admit to doing, and which I have apologised for) or because I did not explain it well enough in my last post (definitely a possibility), but the reason I can say that is quite obvious really; working under the assumption that anything is possible renders arguments like these pointless.
It's the same reason we don't entertain the possibility that gravity is caused by pink, magic elephants, or that the universe is carried up by a giant tortoise; it leads to a logical quagmire. If we are to have no inhibitions, no standards upon which various scenerios are to be judged, no method to discard hopeless theories, no progress would be made.
This applies even more so for FF8, because unlike the universe, we know for a fact that FF8 was a story written for a purpose by authors who had something definite in mind. That is the reason I kept repeating Irvine getting a sex-change; it's an example of the sort of scenarios you render 'possible and plausible' if you embrace the idea that "anything could happen" and "who are we to know?" The R=U theory is simply another example of this. True, it is possible to make up arguments and 'hints' supporting the theory, but none are very good (I'll get back to that), but when push comes to shove, the whole theory is only 'possible' if you decide to fill in the blanks of FF8's future with pure fiction (ie. fan-fiction). There is nothing backing up the scenario that Rinoa is frozen down in the Sorceress Memorial (in fact, the game flatly goes against that when Squall rescues Rinoa from it in the game); there is nothing backing up Rinoa somehow travelling to the future; there is nothing backing up any other possible scenario you can imagine allowing Rinoa to live to become Ultimecia. These are all scenarios with a foundation based on a figment of your imagination, not something told in the game.
Your arguments, and in game examples did nothing to back up this figment of your imagination. They simply attempted to build upon a foundation with no support. That's all well and good, but if the fiundation is flawed, the scenario itself is flawed.
What I am saying is that a theory for any FF game which is to be considered valid and possible and plausible must be firmly rested on what we are told in the game. The R=U theory is firmly rested alright, but not on what the game tells us. That is why I say it with such certainty; if it is not based on the game itself the theory is merely fan-fiction, and not a valid theory. You see, the R=U theory would have been possible and quite plausible IF there had been a natural way for Rinoa to reach Ultimecias era, ie. a way which requires no additional assumptions. If Rinoa had extended lifespan, that would be perfect; with no extra assumptions we can say that Rinoa could live to become Ultimecia. But the Ultimania Guide curshed the hope of such a natural explanation for good, and thus effectively crushed all hopes for the R=U theory to be a valid, plausible theory. Do you disagree? Then please, come up with just a single in-game example which indicates that Rinoa will freeze herself down into the Sorceress Memorial after the game. But until then, it has as much backing as any fan-fiction, and my certaintly will thus remain; Rinoa is not Ultimecia.
You call it hypocrisy, but in reality, it is 'hypocrisy' that is absolutely fundamental to any logical argument, and is one any serious argument should automatically assume. If not, as pointed out, we might as well also discuss Irvine being Ultimecia, and in that case, the argument is pointless. If all you want with this argument is to show how there is always a possible scenario which leads to R=U, then why argue? It's taken for granted that one can conceviably think of a way for Rinoa to become Ultimecia, but that doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not the game supports it. In this case, the game does not support it, hence it is not valid.
You are of course free to believe the theory if you want (I won't stop you), but once you claim that there is logical evidence and hints backing it up, then you have to expect an argument based on such a premise. And as I am hopefully showing, R=U fails under such a premise.
2)
You refer to the R=U theory being backed up by hints and such in the game (despite not actually referring to a single example), but I disagree. I am perfectly familiar with all hints used to support the R=U theory (I'd even dare to say I came up with a few orginal ones myself), and after years of arguments, none have stood the test of careful scrutiny. To save you the trouble of having to write up all the examples you can think of though, I'll rather tell you to read the "Time/Ultimecia Plot FAQ" found here:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/game/197343.html
The R=U section goes through everything relevant to the theory, including all the so-called hints and evidence. If you read through all the counterarguments carefully, and still find reason to believe R=U (besides blind belief due to it being a conceivable scenario), please do explain why here.
3)
Falseheads Plot Analysis is down right bad, flawed and sometimes simply wrong when it comes to the discussion of Time, time compression and R=U.
To give an example from one passage you quoted, falsehead states that "There are many odd aspects to Rinoa. We are told Sorceresses get their potential powers at age five (then it seems they have to inherit full powers from a dying Sorceress)". In fact though, this supposed fact is quite false. What the game says is that one sorceress (Edea) gained powers from a dying sorceress at age 5. Falsehead, clearly not familiar enough with the facts of the game, confuses this with meaning that all sorceress gain potential powers at age 5 and that powers must be received from a dying sorceress, despite the fact that Edea is by no means dying when she gives Rinoa her powers.
I could cite more examples if you want, but I think you get the idea. Her analysis on multiple dimensions using quantum dynamics is overly complex and rather vain really (unless she has a Ph.D in theoretical physics, she probably shouldn't be talking about what is and is not possible through quantum dynamics, especially since most real scientists actually think timetravelling to the past is impossible). There are infinitely simpler ways to explain the timeloop in the game, ones which don't require shallow use of modern scientific concepts.
I am presuming this is inspired by falseheads Plot Analysis (similarities are at least present)? As explained though, that Plot Analysis is simply not good when it comes to time and R=U. The only reason it has remained unchanged for so long is because she told me she simply "didn't have time to update it" (after I sent her a mail pointing out all the flaws).Perhaps in this future, Rinoa does not become Ultimecia, but it still does not by any means count out the argument that Rinoa was the same as the Ultimecia who attempted time compression.
Although this is also not particularly important, I thought I should let you know that using falseheads Plot Analysis as a basis for your arguments probably won't be a good idea.
4)
Just fealt like pointing out that the timeloop isn't nearly as insanely complex as you make it out to be. It is perfectly possible to explain it satisfactorily (although the circular logic it creates is hard to comprehend, it doesn't mean the loop in itself is beyond comprehension). You call me close-minded, but I feel inclined to suggest that it is you who are close-minded for not thinking we are capable of understanding it.Given the fact that Ellone is never fully explained in the game, and that the entire game revolved around an insanely complex time-loop, you are being extremely close-minded when it comes to the plausibility and possibility of Ultimecia being Rinoa.
For the take on time, and the timeloop, I'll refer back to the previously linked FAQ.
---
Hopefully I got with myself the most important bits, and explained myself well enough. If you think I missed out something crucial, please let me know. The main point is in point 1 though, so deal with that if anything.
