Do you believe Preston Jacobs' explanation for dragon riding?

[kimim]

21 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Jacaerys' egg hatched, and Lucerys', and Joffrey's, and Aegon III's. Grey Ghost, Sheepstealer and Cannibal hatched in the wild. There's also Morning, Rhaena's dragon, and, of course, Drogon, Rhaegal and Viserion. So we got: four dragons hatched by/in company of four boys, four dragons hatched by/in company of two girls, three dragons hatched in the wild and the whole crapload of dragons of undisclosed birth.

...then there's this, thank you.

[Lady Lia]

13 hours ago, devilish said:

Also all wild dragons could be tamed by people with the right genes and people like Nettles would not be able to tame a dragon.

 

12 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

And Nettles probably did not have a telepathic bond. Instead of the right genes, Nettles had a clever plan and huge balls. 

Going off on a tangent, why do both of you seem to assume Nettles didn't have the right genes? She didn't look like a Targaryen, but that doesn't stop her from being the bastard, grandbastard or greatgrandbastard of one. After all, that was ostensibly the justification for calling for volunteers from Dragonstone.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

I can buy his hatching ,females are the cradle of life this is known , but Nettles proved that you can tame a dragon and become a dragonrider .

[Ser Scott Malkinson]

3 hours ago, Lady Lia said:

 

Going off on a tangent, why do both of you seem to assume Nettles didn't have the right genes? She didn't look like a Targaryen, but that doesn't stop her from being the bastard, grandbastard or greatgrandbastard of one. After all, that was ostensibly the justification for calling for volunteers from Dragonstone.

True, but it was also mentioned that many people who were not dragonseeds tried to tame a dragon that day. So far the evidence she must have been a dragonseed is that she managed to ride a dragon. And that is only said by people (both inside and outside the story) who assume only Targs are able to ride dragons. This is circular logic, so we cannot claim that only Targs can ride dragons, because we don't know if Nettles has Targ blood. Likewise, we cannot argue Nettles definitely has Targ blood, since it's not clear if only Targs can ride dragons. In my opinion, Nettles has been implanted by GRRM in the story to make us doubt these things, and therefore I think she is not a dragonseed (but I cannot really argue it, since we don't have enough evidence).

[Isobel Harper]

8 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Jacaerys' egg hatched, and Lucerys', and Joffrey's, and Aegon III's. Grey Ghost, Sheepstealer and Cannibal hatched in the wild. There's also Morning, Rhaena's dragon, and, of course, Drogon, Rhaegal and Viserion. So we got: four dragons hatched by/in company of four boys, four dragons hatched by/in company of two girls, three dragons hatched in the wild and the whole crapload of dragons of undisclosed birth.

Rhaenyra, being near her sons in the cradle, would explain Jace, Luc, and Aegon's eggs hatching, as the videos propose.  The videos also propose that Rhaena was a dragon hatcher.  Cannibal, Sheepstealer, and Grey Ghost could have been the hatched from eggs of Targaryens who passed away in the cradle, and thus never bonded to anyone.  

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

6 hours ago, Isobel Harper said:

Rhaenyra, being near her sons in the cradle, would explain Jace, Luc, and Aegon's eggs hatching, as the videos propose.  The videos also propose that Rhaena was a dragon hatcher.  Cannibal, Sheepstealer, and Grey Ghost could have been the hatched from eggs of Targaryens who passed away in the cradle, and thus never bonded to anyone.  

That really doesn't seem like playing fair. Rather, like handwaving away all the facts that don't fit (Jacaerys, Lucerys, Joffrey, Aegon? nope, Rhaenyra did it), and making up new ones (dragons universally known as "wild"? nah, they were hatched from discarded family eggs).

Let's not be gentle. This pot isn't only cracked, it's smashed, it filled with water and sunk.

[Lord Lyman]

12 hours ago, Isobel Harper said:

Rhaenyra, being near her sons in the cradle, would explain Jace, Luc, and Aegon's eggs hatching, as the videos propose.  The videos also propose that Rhaena was a dragon hatcher.  Cannibal, Sheepstealer, and Grey Ghost could have been the hatched from eggs of Targaryens who passed away in the cradle, and thus never bonded to anyone.  

I don't think that the Targaryen would have just tossed the dragon out if the Targaryen there were to bond with passed away. They would just find another Targaryen. Just look at Balerion. He was born over 100 years before Aegon's conquest and was brought to Westeros by Aenar Targaryen. He was used by three different riders, during and after the conquest before dying of old age.  

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/15/2016 at 5:20 AM, AdesteFideles said:

Ok, lets try again. Here we have direct quotes from David Benioff and D.B. Weiss.

From this Variety article.

Oh, and just in case you don't believe that, here's a video on the same story being recounted by GRRM, Benioff and Weiss. I've even time stamped it for you. Note that when he says "we did get it right" GRRM doesn't contradict him. Of course, with GRRM being a liar in your opinion, maybe even this isn't enough.

Now, if even after all this you still believe PJ, you are obviously beyond any help (and are indeed a very, very silly person).

Or just a troll.

Want to tell me what their answer was? Oh wait, that's right, you don't know. And I don't really appreciate being accused of being silly or a troll. I think I am having a pretty thoughtful discussion here.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/15/2016 at 5:32 AM, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Probably isn't. I mean, if GRRM is writing a SF story and deliberately lying to everyone, then why wouldn't D&D, and GRRM with D&D together, be lying also?

As a mental exercise, I'm trying to imagine evidence that could possibly disprove this faith. I'm afraid it simply can't be done.

I dislike the notion that I have faith in PJ. I am a hardcore atheist in real life and generally lack faith of any kind. I didn't buy PJ's stuff for a long time. It was his arguments in this series that made me give him another chance.

[Trigger Warning]

I find it very hard to believe GRRM put this much thought into such things. 

If you actually found "X-chromosome linked genetic disorder" in his personal notes I think I'd die from laughter. 

[Ser Scott Malkinson]

15 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Want to tell me what their answer was? Oh wait, that's right, you don't know. And I don't really appreciate being accused of being silly or a troll. I think I am having a pretty thoughtful discussion here.

Have you seen season 6? Because that makes it pretty obvious what the answer was. Sure, they don't say it in the show either, but they make it pretty darn clear visually. And even if GRRM is trying to trick us with R+L=J, I don't see the show doing that. The show, IMO, oversimplifies the books a bit too much (although I still like it a lot) and already the Unsullied are having a hard time piecing things together (I heard of some who thought after the reveal that Ned and Lyanna were Jon's parents ).

And even if you are someone who thinks GRRM never told the full story to D&D out of spite (which I don't: GRRM has worked for tv, he knows adaptations needed to be made), that couldn't have been a reason not to tell them when he allowed them to do the show and told them all the important stuff. And I'd say the true parentage of Jon Snow, which was so important it was the game-changing question GRRM asked D&D before allowing them to do the show, would've been part of that stuff.

[AdesteFideles]

22 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Want to tell me what their answer was? Oh wait, that's right, you don't know. And I don't really appreciate being accused of being silly or a troll. I think I am having a pretty thoughtful discussion here.

@Ser Scott Malkinson below has already said all I was going to.

7 hours ago, Ser Scott Malkinson said:

Have you seen season 6? Because that makes it pretty obvious what the answer was. Sure, they don't say it in the show either, but they make it pretty darn clear visually. And even if GRRM is trying to trick us with R+L=J, I don't see the show doing that. The show, IMO, oversimplifies the books a bit too much (although I still like it a lot) and already the Unsullied are having a hard time piecing things together (I heard of some who thought after the reveal that Ned and Lyanna were Jon's parents ).

And even if you are someone who thinks GRRM never told the full story to D&D out of spite (which I don't: GRRM has worked for tv, he knows adaptations needed to be made), that couldn't have been a reason not to tell them when he allowed them to do the show and told them all the important stuff. And I'd say the true parentage of Jon Snow, which was so important it was the game-changing question GRRM asked D&D before allowing them to do the show, would've been part of that stuff.

Also, are you saying that they got the answer right, then decided to film an entirely different reveal?

There's also that infographic that HBO themselves put out.

 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

20 hours ago, AdesteFideles said:

@Ser Scott Malkinson below has already said all I was going to.

Also, are you saying that they got the answer right, then decided to film an entirely different reveal?

There's also that infographic that HBO themselves put out.

 

Yes, I am saying they got the answer right and made the show different from the books, because the book answer is too complicated to explain in the show, and they never laid any ground work for Brandon and Ashara. Similar to how they cut the dialogue about Tysha from Tywin's death scene, because it could have been jarring for viewers who didn't remember that conversation from season 1. So I think in the books Dany is not Dany, but I think in the show Dany is Dany. All to say that if the ending depends on those 2 characters having special genes, they can have different parentage from the books but still justifiably have the right genes to make the ending make sense.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/16/2016 at 7:08 PM, Trigger Warning said:

I find it very hard to believe GRRM put this much thought into such things.

Why?

[Ser Scott Malkinson]

6 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Yes, I am saying they got the answer right and made the show different from the books, because the book answer is too complicated to explain in the show, and they never laid any ground work for Brandon and Ashara. Similar to how they cut the dialogue about Tysha from Tywin's death scene, because it could have been jarring for viewers who didn't remember that conversation from season 1. So I think in the books Dany is not Dany, but I think in the show Dany is Dany. All to say that if the ending depends on those 2 characters having special genes, they can have different parentage from the books but still justifiably have the right genes to make the ending make sense.

So this answer which was SO crucial in the decision to let them make the show was left out of the show?! Do you not realise how little sense that makes?

[AdesteFideles]

13 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Yes, I am saying they got the answer right and made the show different from the books, because the book answer is too complicated to explain in the show, and they never laid any ground work for Brandon and Ashara. Similar to how they cut the dialogue about Tysha from Tywin's death scene, because it could have been jarring for viewers who didn't remember that conversation from season 1. So I think in the books Dany is not Dany, but I think in the show Dany is Dany. All to say that if the ending depends on those 2 characters having special genes, they can have different parentage from the books but still justifiably have the right genes to make the ending make sense.

Well, we will have to agree to disagree, but I can accept you have your reasons.

I guess we can talk about this in... however many years it takes for the next book.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/18/2016 at 2:20 PM, AdesteFideles said:

Well, we will have to agree to disagree, but I can accept you have your reasons.

I guess we can talk about this in... however many years it takes for the next book.

Sounds great! Looking forward to it

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/18/2016 at 2:16 PM, Ser Scott Malkinson said:

So this answer which was SO crucial in the decision to let them make the show was left out of the show?! Do you not realise how little sense that makes?

I think it makes perfect sense. George quizzed them to make sure they were serious and actually fans. Later, for TV reasons, they made the show different from the books in many aspects, including this particular issue. Tada!

I get what you're saying, but just because this particular question was vital to giving them the rights to the show does not necessarily mean that they then couldn't possibly make the show different regarding Jon's parentage. Yes, you would think they would keep it the same, but you would also think that they wouldn't take books 4 and 5 and set them on fire. So I'm not basing any theory on the show. It cannot be trusted, except for the couple things when they have explicitly said it is the same. This is not one of those things.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/15/2016 at 3:56 AM, Gertrude said:

There are some beautiful plot twists, but when it comes down to it, they are pretty simple and the beauty of them is the human motivations and emotion, not because it's a masterful puzzle to unravel, IMO. Baelish and Varys are the exceptions, but they are set up to be the masterminds. If we look for and find puppet-masters under every rock, it loses the punch. In other words, if everyone is a secret Targ, then being a Targ is not interesting anymore.

I don't really have an argument that I'm going to bother typing here about this because it would be super long but I just want to say I disagree so much. Varys is a puppet master. LF is a puppet master. Doran is a puppet master. Stannis is sort of puppet master at the current point in the story. Mance could be considered a puppet master. And the children are super puppet masters. I think the story is a million times more interesting if the children killed the king, started the war, manipulated LF, sent the zombies after the lord commander, and sent (and killed) Bran's assassin, not to mention all the crazy shit those other people did. Why would you think George would stop with just Varys and LF?

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 10/15/2016 at 9:04 AM, Jon's Queen Consort said:

You may agree or disagree with whatever you want. That doesn't make you right and me wrong or the other way around. My opinion about his fan fictions are a lot of distorted nonsense with no logical or text proof. It isn’t logic that Robb would have named Cat, a person who has no blood connection with the North and has committed high treason as the heir. It isn’t logical to think that Dany was either much older that people say that she is or that she was born from a mother who was dead for 8 or 9 months before her birth. It’s not logical to claim that Cat wouldn’t had noticed the difference between a newborn and a 9 months old or even one year old.

 

A mother would had noticed the difference between a 6 months old and a 10 moths old. Also in order for Dany to be Lyanna's daughter she needs either to be born 9 months after Lyanna's death or a 9 months old Dany to pass off  as a newborn. People would had noticed how big Dany was and we would had learnt about it.

You're making some assumptions about time lines here. We don't know when exactly Cat traveled to WF after the war and saw Jon for the first time. It could have been an 18 month Jon being passed off as 15 months for all we know. Same thing with Dany, we don't know at all what the situation was with her and Viserys, if this theory is correct.

And it is logic that Robb would pick cat. Yeah, you made 2 good points why he maybe shouldn't, but I presented evidence that he actually did. So your argument on that one is pretty weak.