• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About wolfmaid7

  • Rank
    High Priestess of the King Heretic
  • Birthday 08/26/1980

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Under the sea where the Crows are white as snow
  • Interests
    Magic,Mythology,Cultural Anthropology,Global Health and Epidemiology.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,045 profile views
  1. Place holder.
  2. What does Ned cheating on her have to do with this. Where is it shown that 1. She believes this. 2. More importantly that Ned told her that Jon was born after Robb. If we are asserting Ned isn't Jon's father.Nothing he did with any other woman has any bearing on when Jon was conceived or born. What I am trying to get at is what Cat believes and why.Lastly,what is the basis for her belief.Is it because she knows this which could only happen from Ned( you have to show that he told her) or was Jon's age eventually decided for reasons having to do with Robb? I will put the texts later to show what I mean.
  3. May I interject with a disagreement.The argument of anyone noticing a difference between Jon and Robb as children has always been very strange to me for a few reasons. It seems based on a few assumptions. The only reason Cat could find something strange about Jon's age compared to Robb's is if she knows when Jon was born. There is no indication Cat knows this or more importantly that Ned told her when Jon was born. Without this info Cat is in no position to think anything other than what she thinks she already knows. That Ashara or some girl Ned met on campaign may be Jon's mom. Jon could have been two years when he showed up at Winterfell and it wouldn't be strange.As long as Ned said he was the father. So why are we saying Cat would have notice the difference in age when there is no basis for which she would notice.
  4. I don't even recall Edric saying Jon was there with Wylla.Or that anyone observed him there.Only that she was his mom. I would expect someone in between to say something. I'm trying to work the following out mentally.Hypothetically speaking did he bypass Riverun and not see his newborn son and Cat.Or Hypothetically speaking did he go by a different route?
  5. Again, it is an opinion.....( In this case yours) that what "people" put together over the years are "the clues" and interpreted correctly.I never once made any such claim that other readers followed the same process as me to discover something. Not only is that incorrect,it has nothing to do with the argument. I also made no assertion on anyone's behalf. I am simply repeating what other posters themselves have stated. I then said to you, do a search on the forum. See how many people: 1. "Said" they went to the RLJ thread and were convinced by what was put as clues 2. How many people went with RLJ despite the flaws. 3. How many people never took it as the answer and had something else in mind. Ahhhh, you are one of those who believe Lyanna died at the toj after giving birth to Jon there. I'm sorry but (and this is my fault). A large part of the RLJ theory is the toj. So let me say, regarding the toj, that location and any scenario that involves it doesn't give any insight into who fathered Jon. We can't put Lyanna and or Rhaegar at anytime there together. 1. The idea that Lyanna was there comes from Ned's dream. All elements in Ned's dream because it is a dream;need not have happened in the same space and time. 2. I charge you to find me any where in the text by a reliable narrator that shows Ned with Jon in between Dorne and Winterfell.He supposedly traveled from Dorne with Howland and a wetnurse all the way to WF.He dropped off Barbery's horse.They had to eat,rest do all of these things in between that journey.Find me anyone who claims that they saw Ned with a baby and a woman. There is no way ,absolutely no way after having lossed Lyanna would Robert Baratheon let Ned take his son to be raised at WF.That would never happen, are you forgetting who we are talking about? Robert " I am the king" Robert? This is what Robert would do,he would make Jon his heir. He would still marry Cersie under Jon Arryn's advice ( to keep Tywin in check). And Jon would never make it to his third baby because Cersie would have had him killed.We don't have to guess what hee choice would be.We know what she would do. "She saw at once that Ned had reached a very different conclusion. "The only truths I know are here. The south is a nest of adders I would do better to avoid." The above is what Ned felt about court,why would he have wanted Jon in that? Consider Cat's statement,Jon was already settled at WF by the time she came home when the wars were over. Ned could have brought Jon from around the corner for all we know. When you are speaking to people who don't subscribe to RLJ it would help if you not project the tenants of that belief to the other arguement. This is why you and i are having a hard time communicating.You don't have to believe what i do ,but in order to uunderstand you need to find out if a reader believes the fundamentals on which RLJ stands are in fact what they believe. E.g. The part i bolded and underlined is a prime example. RLJ believes that Lyanna extracted a promise from Ned to protect Jon "from Robert".So obviously, to you the promise has to be something specifically along those lines. I don't believe Lyanna went into such specifics , a general plea when it comes to that would suffice. 1. I wan't to lie nex to Brandon and father. ( That alone tells us that she wanted to be buried at home.Short simple and you get the point.She is on her way out. I wan't to show you a parallel: "I promise." Promise me, Ned, Lyanna's voice echoed. "The girl," the king said. "Daenerys. Let her live. If you can, if it … not too late … talk to them … Varys, Littlefinger … don't let them kill her. And help my son, Ned. Make him be … better than me." He winced. "Gods have mercy." The above is Robert's death which was super-imposed on Ned's memory of Lyanna's death.Here we see Robert pleading for Dany's life.An innocent child that was not his.... But here's the part i want you to keep in mind.He also asks Ned to make a simple promise that encompasses a lot. " Help my son,Ned.Make him be....better than me." That is an open ended promise on which the specifics of how that was carried out depended on Ned. He excercised it in this way by not even thinking of Cersie's kids.He in his mind thought of Robert's bastards. So what does this have to do with what Lyanna may have asked Ned? There is no need to invent and create a boogey man from which Jon needs to be saved,especially if nothing is pointing to that except fan speculation. A simple " Ned watch over my son." To which Ned would be the one who decided how best to " watch over Jon." Enter "his" reasoning for never wanting Jon to be raised with Robert. No no no, i went back and looked at my post i said " the author has written it whereby it is Robert's children that were and still are in danger from Mad Cersie.This is the current story...She laments that Cat has left her to deal with Jon Snow,and we have a true statement from Tyrion on how Cersie hated Robert so much she would kill anything that was his.How much now would she hate Jon Snow.The son of her husband by a woman whose name he would call out in bed. A woman who Cersie affirmed that Robert was still in love with. You are doing it again. We can't look at what we might have done or what Ned should have done.I am telling you what Ned thought and believed that is not ever going to change.You can't get around that. Still looking at things through RLJ lens. TTHE,you are making complicated something that need not be. Ned is honest about why he isn't taking Jon south. We see societal and political reasons why he wouldn't want to get Jon tied up in the madness in the south if he were Robert's. Its not a smokescreen, you are inventing something to fit another. Cat made it clear that overtime she grew to love Ned,and i'm pretty sure it would have taken time for that to delvelop on Ned's part as well. He had no reason to tell Cat anything regarding Jon's parentage. The same reason he wouldn't tell her if Rhaegar was Jon's father is the same reason he wouldn't tell her if Robert was his father.Either way it has nothing to do with anything regarding Jon's protection. It comes down to this,for what possible reason would Ned have to tell Cat be it Rhaegar or Robert. He would be telling her for???? The bolded is incorrect.Read the context of Ned's jail house lament. It was in response to his auditory hallucination of Robert's query. " How did we get here? You in jail and me killed by a pig." What ever Ned lied about would have changed the course of where they both ended up. Also,Robert was seconds away from death, telling him about Joffrey when he was about to die would have accomplished nothing except pulled Percy from "Green mile" on Robert. . In fact Ned outright stated:" It is your reasoning that is flawed my friend.Why would Ned be sorry about NOT telling his friend something that would obviously hurt him? You didn't want to hear. There is nothing muddled or incoherent about saying something being obvious a point of view. If posters say RLJ is obvious it offends many. it is a matter of opnion based on individual factors.None of which matters in the end because it all comes down to what GRRM says. His goals about constructing a mystery re: His nana. His wife's own statements on this mystery tells me. 1.If RLJ is the answer GRRM's nana would have figured it out in no time and that can't be reconciled. 2. Parris says her hubby doesn't do obvious and what point of view she is speaking from. She thinks its obvious. How hard is that to grasp? Not hard, you want to hear something and you aren't so you are grasping. You didn't ask that didn't you? You asked why has Ned not thought so? But i will bite with two or three examples. Ned would find a way to say something right? or think and do something right? E.g. Ned made it a habit to talk to Jon often about Robert,whom he elevated in Jon's eyes over everyone ( a giant among princes) now who "princes"on the Trident could Ned have been speaking about? This scene is beautifully written. It is that of a best friend telling a son about his father in his own way. He couldn't tell Jon that Robert was his dad,but he made damn sure to hype Robert in his eyes;telling him how awesome he was. Then we have this: This is Ned thinking of how in famous Robert's lusts was before entering the brothel where his bastard was.. you know? Of the girl who evoked Lyanna for Ned. Happening on seperate pages is one fluid scene by Ned.Whose lusts was he speaking of before going to visit said brothel? You also mentioned something about moments of being nervous etc. The following is the next couple of chapters but again its like one scene. And you say you wanted to see some kind of concern.The double entendres are just too priceless here.Other than that,this freaked Ned out. I do not think i need to explain this or why Ned is freaked out. You didn't quote anything. you keep misrepresenting what i said or not quoting parts at all.So let's leave it that. You are doing it again.You flippantly used something i said to RLJ ers thinking "the earth was flat" . I 100% used the term the earth is flat but you misrepresented what i said. I said plainly to paraphrase at one point those who thought the earth was flat were the majority.That thinking and them being in the majority didn't change the fact that they were wrong. Its as simple as that. You somehow got it twisted that i was calling RLJers a name or saying something personal against them.No i wasn't. The constant misrepresentation is what i called dishonest because i felt....I am using an "I" statement that you were doing it intetionally. Again and i am repeating myself. I didn't reject it because it was obvious. I told you flat out there were things about the theory that bothered me. I wouldn't reconcile it and just swept those things under the carpet. It wasn't really interested.There was a time on here Jon's parentage was the answer to everything wrong with Westeros.But I has Other mysteries to devout time to. I didn't do this for Jon's parentage but i did do this when it came to the Others.Why that is important is because reading the text i knew what history said about the Others and i knew to doubt the eye witness account. The same flaws at the core regarding the Others were the same flaws that came to mind when i saw "RLJ" the only difference was.. At the time i was more interested in the Others and showing proof for that theory to really care about RLJ like that. Lastly, you have failed,failed to counter my texts with anything remotely feasible. Every rebutal you have had has been thrown down by text because "your" reasoning is flawed.It is flawed because you think the fundamentals of RLJ is a one fit all that needs to be answered for you to see merit. 1. You like so many others have conclusions, and you make that RLJ instead of just not contorting text. 2. You somehow think Ned could see through glass candles or something and so you answer in terms of what you think should have or could instead of just simply looking at what was and is. To quote The Matrix " One cannot see pass the choices one already made. Ned had a belief based on culture,religion,politics and he made choices that reflect those beliefs. As time went by he still kept a watchful eye and made choices based on what Cersie did. I am not saying that IMO Wylla,Ashara,FD aren't red herrings.You get no disagreement from me on those.I'm saying a red herring is more than just a name(s) being thrown out for people to follow. Note: No disrespect to anyone who believes that Ashara or Wylla is Jon's mom. Again what is a red herring: something especially a clue, that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting.
  6. No I am not.....That was clearly not the context. She said her husband doesn't do obvious.Nowhere did I say you have know about her.How is that suppose to help?I said don't dismiss her statements nor GRRM. As to taking into consideration his other works.That is helpful in seeing his style and use if various devices. This comment about the writer's style is not an oddity.Go on RLJ and you will see several statements regarding his style and the like. The reason why some people say its obvious is because they have points of reference. I'm not the first to say such a thing.So why sound so shock?
  7. A question, where does it say in the text by reliable sources who would know that Ned brought a baby back from Dorne? Didn't Cat say when she arrived at WF Jon and his wetnurse were already settled in? So Ned traveled all the way from Dorne with his sister's remains,a wetnurse,Howland, dropped off Barbery's horse and no one at any point sees him traveling with a woman and a baby?
  8. Whatever,lets stay on topic. You never asked why i believe Robert is Jon's father.The two questions i was asked i answered and i said this isn't a place to go into all the reasons why i believe. My thread doesn't even go into all the reasons. You speak with another's mouth and if other's are using colored fonts why can't i? I already did,and to reiterate it is 100% better whether than your reasoning which is have Jon be Targ first and then fit everything else in.this is what RLJ is. Not unneccessary,but i agree it would be hard to forgive.Ding ding ding.Well look at that. What are you talking about? Robert is not a danger to his bastards.Where ever are you getting that? Again where are you getting this notion that Robert is a danger to his kids? I never said that.What you think Ned might do is irrelevant.Ned already has told you what he thinks regarding life an court for bastards and one of the reasons why Jon wasn't going to go.You don't have to like it,but it is what Ned believes. My point wasn't muddled you are just being dishonest. Post all text provided and not just some to get context. Ned provides the reasons why Robert's bastards aren't at court.....He flat out notices through the years and states they aren't there because of Cersie.What part of that aren't you getting? The look Ned gave her was anguished. 1."You know I cannot take him south. There will be no place for him at court. A boy with a bastard's name … you know what they will say of him. He will be shunned." Catelyn armored her heart against the mute appeal in her husband's eyes. "They say your friend Robert has fathered a dozen bastards himself."2. And none of them has ever been seen at court!" Ned blazed. "The Lannister woman has seen to that. The above is two reasons why Ned says Jon isn't going to court and why Robert's bastards aren't welcomed. You can't get anymore clearer than Ned telling you "whys" The writer has given us several texts that shows Cersie to be a past and present threat to all Robert bastards. Soooooo Ned lying when the arguement is for RLJ is in character??? Ok i gotcha. Let me give you a text to that reply about Ned lying to Robert being out of character and poor reasoning. So what were you saying with that? Ummmm if he thinks of Jon being rober'ts that would be giving it away duhhhh!!! Actually Jon is hidden when Robert turns up at WF. Though Jon assumes Cat is the reason. Actually he was on the opposite side of the hall in the back. I would like you to read all the descriptions of Robert's children,down to Mya in the Vale. Their black hair or blue eyes isn't the least of what is said about them. Then compare what you find to what is unusuall about Jon. To quote Syrio: " You look without the seeing. I didn't say "you" are potash i said arguements are. I don't attack people as you are now. I am very certain i didn't misrepresent what i said. you are just choosing not to quote it in context which is not incoherent. I take GRRM at his word. i take his previous works into consideration and i take his wife's opnion more than yours. Again, now you are just being insulting and we have nothing more to say. I haven't attacked you personally or anyone.Let's leave this at that. I reject it because it failed to reach GRRM's standard. I was asked two questions. Who i believe his parents are? And Why Ned didn't give Jon to Robert. The answers i gave to those two questions despite your dishonesty was wayyyy better and more textual than the reason given by RLJ and you. It doesn't require belief that Robert and Lyanna are Jon's parents beforehand.It doesn't need the conclusion to lead you to the conclusion. It is taking Ned at his word,exactly what he says and seeing exactly what he thinks and why. To put this "it obvious debate to rest." Do you think GRRM's nana could have figured RLJ out? You take Paris's statement into consideration? Do you take GRRM's word and his other works into consideration? If you are honestly answer those questions then you should have no gripe about me saying( based on all these,how i solved this so call mistery) that IMO,its obvious. If you don't care then why agree to be second party in a conversation? Also, how exactly am i mocking RLJ believers? So what, RLJers can call other posters theories crackpots and worse.make statements "about posters" and that's ok.However, the moment someone calls it obvious or a red herring you all get butt hurt? Come on man be fair. Read the definition of what makes a red herring a red herring.
  9. Place holder.
  10. We can agree that Jon "thinks" he knows his own birthday. His birthday is what the authority figures around him says it is. Though, imo ample clues have been left in the text to question Jon's age. You are doing two things here and both are problematic. 1. You are assuming that the KGs presence there is important and relates to Jon. 2. You are assuming it could only relate to Jon. 3. You are then by your bolded beginning with a conclusion to prove your point. So I cannot give you an answer based on the parameters you set. I didn't answer because i can't answer something illogical logically. Again, what Jon can tell us regarding his name day is what he himself was led to believe.Like i said,there is evidence that what he has been led to believe may be wrong. The answer honestly at least part of it is in your answer. Why make Jon younger than Robb....Think about the fact that they could lie about when he was born and they did.
  11. They were literally trying to leave their mark so to speak. I couldn't help it,the set up was there.
  12. @Jon_Stargaryen I'm not picking on you,i'm using this as an example in one of your post.This is an example of what i mean in how the clues used in RLJ are reasoned out. If people are honest, truly honest they will call a spade a spade. this is what Jon star wrote: "No. I'm using it as further evidence to bolster my point. The Kingsguard being at the Tower of Joy to keep one girl hostage is odd, but stranger things have happened in the series. But if you take the theory of R+L=J into account. It makes more sense." Please,please someone be honest and tell me what is wrong with this?
  13. Thank you very much Ygrain you are to kind. You didn't have to go through all that trouble seeing as its in my sig. But thanks for being a doll....Buh bye, duces Wrong thread for this debate.You asked a question,i answered. You wanted to know what i believe i told you what i believe.Seeing as i have and had no desire to convince anyone this is pointless. The purpose of the Heresy project was have everyone's ideas and theories for posterity.When GRRM finally lets us know who Jon's parents are a Heresy reveal thread will be posted to discuss. But i'll do this,( and i am doing it just to show what i mean about how most of you guys reason things, or just make crap up and pass it as fact). I bolded two claims in your statement that "YOU SAID WERE FACTS" Facts y'uall !!! 1.Prove to me textually .Show me the texts where it states or shows that Lyanna according to you " hated Robert "and "didn't want to marry him." 2. Quantify for me what " of and age" means regarding Jon. Do these two things for me, and we can have a debate about how there is " no proof that Robert and Lyanna" are Jon's parents. Can you do that? That fair,if not there is no need to go further.
  14. I will gladly answer your question, but i will also like to point out your attitude expressed in the bolded is exactly one of the problems on this site. You have no idea what i'm going to say, yet you already resigned in your mind that my reason is NOT liking the obvious so i'm settling for something with gaping holes? Are you serious right now? This is the unwarranted, self inflated RLJ egotism expressed by many of its proponents right there. Take that how you wish.Back to your question. "Based on" you ask- What I believe are the clues, its as simple as that. Why didn't Ned give Robert to raise Jon? Well to be honest if i had the same info as Ned did at the time; i wouldn't give Robert Jon to raise. Back on track now. Ned didn't give Jon to Robert because of the following: " 1.It important to understand that Ned's fears reflect a societal and religious view of bastards.This is what Ned believes in totality be he right or wrong this is his belief. "If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lusts? "Lord Baelish, what do you know of Robert's bastards?"(Ned, agot). "The old High Septon told my father that king's laws are one thing, and the laws of the gods another. Trueborn children are made in a marriage bed and blessed by the Father and the Mother, but bastards are born of lust and weakness, he said. King Aegon decreed that his bastards were not bastards, but he could not change their nature. The High Septon said all bastards are born to betrayal”---Egg to Dunk. “Bastard children were born from lust and lies, men said; their nature was wanton and treacherous. Once Jon had meant to prove them wrong, to show his lord father he could as good a true son as Robb Stark.” ---Jon Snow. "Cersei could not have been pleased by her lord husband's by-blows, yet in the end it mattered little whether the king had one bastard or a hundred. Law and custom gave the baseborn few rights. Gendry, the girl in the Vale, the boy at Storm's End, none of them could threaten Robert's trueborn children …(Eddard VII AGOT). Sum: As a bastard which Jon is ,from Ned's point understanding of society,religion and the law Jon would be shunned at court.He knew what the stain of bastardry meant and it didn't matter if Robert would have given him a name.It just would have been an unhappy place for Jon. 2.We also know from Ned's conversation with Cat that he has been observing over the years if Robert's bastards are welcomed at court. He knows they are not and fingers Cersie as the reason they aren't welcomed at court.Even if Ned prior to going to KL didn't know that Cersie was capable of killing Robert's children he had a good enough second reason for Jon not to know. And as fate would have it we have now come to a place now where it is Robert's children that are a threat to Cersie.Jon being Rhaegar's son was never relevant to his saftey.That is an assumption.Jon is now a threat should his parentage be revealed....From Cersie and with good reason it's already being set up that way. a.“Catelyn Tully was a mouse, or she would have smothered this Jon Snow in his cradle. Instead, she's left the filthy task to me (AFFC Cersie).” b.“There was another bastard, a boy (Gendry), older. I took steps to see him removed from harm's way...but I confess, I never dreamed the babe would be at risk. A base born girl, less than a year old, with a whore for a mother, what threat could she pose?” "She was Robert’s that was enough for Cersei it would seem (Tyrion&Varys ACOK). c.“Once, after that sorry business with the cat, he (Robert) had made some noises about bringing some baseborn daughter of his to court. “Do as you please," she'd told him, "but you may find that the city is not a healthy place for a growing girl.”(AFFC,Cersie). This question seems very important for you to have answer,so i am specifically answering your question.As a point there is nothing but the assumption that Ned didn't tell Robert because he would kill Jon.I really need you all to think about how utterly ridiculous that is.RLJ created a question it thinks was important and needed to be answered;then answered it. I mean Jeez.I mean seriously RLJ created a Boogey man in Jon in order to make Jon a Targ whereby robert could be a threat. Dude really? Don't assume stuff you don't know because you haven't asked.I have made it very clear as a character i don't like Robert. I've admitted that bias frequently, but evidence is evidence. You then now make potash of yourself by claiming there is no evidence that Robert is Jon's father which is your opinion. When its all said and done GRRM will reveal who picked up true clues vs red herrings. I wish i had a face palm emoji.... Dude there was no process needed,no extensive thought to ponder by me to shout RLJ.Just recognizing what was a familiar tale.That's why to me if this is the solution it is was obvious. That pattern was very easy to identify and what jumped out at me was the condensed form i posted.That pattern so blatant on "the cover" imo suggest a herring.You really don't listen or you do and just don't accept reality. I re-read with no expectation except to tell a few people i was still arriving at RLJ. He is telling and writing his story.What did i say? We are along for the ride.Wanting to construct a really good mystery that would stump even your Nana and your wife is not a trick. Yes, i honestly think the story will have a reveal that Jon is Robert's and Lyanna. This ain't the most important thing in the story dude,there are bigger things going on.I'm not trying or have a desire to convince you or anyone i am just stating a theory i believe makes more sense. Only GRRM is going to answer that and what you or I believe or don't believe isn't going to stop him telling his story. Here what, why don't you go on the several sites dedicated to " When posters knew RLJ" or the like and see how many people got it based on coming to the RLJ thread.Its probably going to be worse thanks to the "mummer's show." Again i really wish my face palm theory, excuse me if you think the strength of this theory is dependant on how many people believe it; I'll let you in on a secret. The earth really is flat....Shhh Yeah your right, he just repeats several other patterns starting from the Bible,The Odyssy,Anansi stories,Grimm Fairy tales,Disney and television. Its insight into how an author writes you would do well to keep that in mind. Not ignoring the story,just ignoring the red dragon herring. Dude this ideology is so enmeshed with all types of fallacy and just wrong thinking i don't even know how to begin to answer you except to remind you and i had to explain this to someone. A red herring doesn't have to be stated to be a red herring. Because no one in the story suggested RL are his parents doesn't mean it isn't a red herring. Definition:Red Herring- something, especially a clue, that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting. What a lot of people didn't and did notice has no bearing on what is the truth or not.A lot of you guys need to get this straight. If a lot of people didn't "notice" it then a lot of people didn't notice it and GRRM did his job well. Where is that danm face palm emoji... What i think about it being obvious doesn't matter.Somehow many of you proponents get offended when people say its obvious. If you look at what GRRM has written and done on tv this really is super obvious for him.Again, nothing to prove just giving it to you straight. To me RLJ is just another theory.I am just telling you who i believe Jon's parents are.
  15. I think Robert and Lyanna are Jon's parents. Baseless is a harsh word to characterize what the opposition to this theory have said. I don't deny why RLJ would be seen as the answer by many. As to not having gaps that would contradict the theory ,that has been and is up for debate.IMO,there are several aspects of this theory that just don't stand up.What i'm about to say and point out is one of the major problems with RLJ IMO. 1.A person has to already believe the theory for the clues to make sense. 2. The theory IS the foundation not the clues instead of the clues being the foundation of the theory. E.g. What you posted as clues: 1.You assume that the KGs being at the tower is somehow and HAS to be relevant and important to Jon.So to RLJ it is a clue and if its not answered it makes any theory invalid. a. Could the KG being at the tower be nothing else but being there for Jon?That doesn't tell me who his parents are. 2.You are assuming that Wylla having nursed Jon can ONLY mean that it has something to do with RLJ. a.So what if Wylla nursed Jon? He needed a wet nurse.What does that have to do with who are his parents?What does it have to do with RLJ? 3.You are assuming that Ned being honorable or not and bringing home a bastard can only mean its relevant to RLJ. a.So Ned being honorable and bringing home a bastard could only mean its Rhaegar's?No it doesn't. 4.You are assuming Ned not telling Jon or Cat can ONLY mean he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son. a. Again why is this important and can its importance if any only mean Lyanna and Rhaegar are Jon's parent? No it doesn't 5.Ned never tells Robert Wylla is Jon's mother.Robert asks Ned about the girl he had a moment with and Robert assumed she was Jon's mother. Think of this.If Robert thinks Ned had a one time moment with a girl,and he had a bastard isn't it logical to Robert that the one time fling resulted in Jon?He just let Robert believe his momentary lapse resulted in Jon. I can go on ,and on with this.In the end it comes to the same thing. Most of the elements of RLJ relies on having a preconcieved idea about what the clues are and or how they can be fityes to the theory. Here's the thing though.One doesn't need to be a Targ to control a dragon.One only need have the blood of a Targ/Old Valyria but not the name. E.g.Why else would Mel assume Stannis has a dragon to wake,and why else would Aemon first hope stannis was TPTWP. "He has the blood,Egg's little girl." Who was Robert,Stannis and Renly's grandmother.She was a Targ. Dany has bonded to the dragon who called out to her with Dragonsong, and bathe her in fire in her dream and she was not consumed- Drogon The other two are up for grabs from anyone who can do the same or bind a dragon through sorcery.All she did was wake them.They did not call to her and she did not answer them. Wasn't aguing with myself just pointing out what my process in this journey was about ,and i still haven't nor feel the need to go through every detail to tell you the same thing- I don't subscribe to this theory. I don't think you are "listening" to what i am saying. This is all matter of context,and i apologize if i missed a few steps in pulling this together for you. I do have a tendency to project a conversation 4 thoughts down the line with the other party in the dark. You recall me saying its not as easy as us saying its obvious .You also saw me post IMO it is obvious. It is obvious and not obvious depending on who you ask. 1.You have posters who have honestly stated not to have seen it reading wise,and they came on here and went on the RLJ thread and the "clues" they pointed out convinced them.These people still didn't get it ,they were basically told what were clues and that formed a belief. If people are honest and not BSing themeselves they will agree with that statement. 2.You have others who because of certain influences of literature saw familiar elements and made a conclusion based on that. I admit i was in that category and totally dismissed the things that sounded a warning bell in my mind. 3.Then their were those who saw the truth AND the herring running side by side.They were more familiar in some cases with GRRM's other works and so they picked up on the misdirections,unreliable narrators etc a bit quicker. So who is right? Those who say it is obvious or those who say it isn't? I'm saying what "we" think doesn't matter because we are just along for the ride. 4. Then there is GRRM who speaks about wanting to suprise fans,creating a mysteries that his grandmother couldn't figure out and whose wife says in response to this same arguement ( I believe someone from Heresy has this quote) that GRRM doesn't do obvious. Numero 4 is the crux of the matter. 1.I have to believe based on what GRRM has said, his grandmother would figure RLJ out. 2. I have to believe Paris who says her husband doesn't do obvious. So I ask you again. How am i using the same old "its to obvious arguement?,"how exactly am i changing my tune now? Nope,I never said RLJ is the most logical, you are putting words in my mouth with that one.In a nutshell it was lazy reading with regard to that. When I mistrusted the info on the Others I sought until I found the answer because I was interested in this aspect. I didn't care who was Jon's parents so when the problems with it arose in my mind I didn't care to answer those questions. My motive for even looking at it was just to bring balance back to Heresy.But again after reading it I came out on the not RLJ aspect. I was tethering between Aerys and Robert for a bit.Robert won due to crucial factors that I palmed myself in the face for later.