Do you believe Preston Jacobs' explanation for dragon riding?

[Zoo_Dane]

1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I think this is a classic example of people misunderstanding PJ (no offense). He doesn't create wild theories out of thin air and then bend and twist the text to fit (which certainly happens in A LOT of theories out there). He has theories that sound ridiculous at first, because they go against everything we think we know about the story, but if you actually listen to him it is 100% based on the text. Yes he can over-complicate sometimes, or read too much into particular lines of dialogue, but overall his theories are well-grounded in the text. That being said, there are videos of his that I watched several times and still didn't believe him. I think people get the impression they have to do mental gymnastics, which is the original impression I got from his vids, but if you really REALLY analyze his arguments, they are very well put together. I don't agree with him on everything, but I agree with him on most things.

Right, but my whole point was that he misunderstands Mendelian genetics. If he's going to use that as an argument for a theory it needs to fit the science. It doesn't fit the science of Mendelian genetics as he proposes it. 

[YOVMO]

2 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Sort of yeah, my personal theory is the the COTF are basically genetic engineers, manipulating history to produce people with the right genes for some ultimate nefarious purpose, which I have several guesses on what that could be (but that's slightly less important). I think the COTF sent dreams to Dany the Dreamer to get the Targs out of harms way before causing the Doom, which seems like a very similar event to Hardhome, also caused by the COTF (in my personal theory). I think they lured Howland Reed to the God's Eye to basically give him a mission, that mission being to go to the Harrenhal tourney and make sure that 2 Ice + Fire couples get together, R+L and B+A. I think the existence of Jon and Dany themselves (the children of these 2 parallel unions) with their special genes are essentially the main goal of the COTF (other than the stuff involving Bran). Yes, there is clearly a difference between Warging and dragon riding. I think the COTF are trying to combine these genetic abilities. Not that I desire to defend my own theory when it's hard enough to defend PJ

Very interesting. I also like the b + a theory. 

Id love to see you post a thread with all the stuff you allude to in one big spot. 

[Isobel Harper]

24 minutes ago, Zoo_Dane said:

Right, but my whole point was that he misunderstands Mendelian genetics. If he's going to use that as an argument for a theory it needs to fit the science. It doesn't fit the science of Mendelian genetics as he proposes it. 

Couldn't co-dominance play a role?

[Illyrio Mo'Parties]

I don't know whether it's right or wrong, but I hope it's wrong. I'm comfortable for dragon-riding and other things to remain somewhat mysterious; having it all boil down to some quasi-scientific explanation is rather deflating, if you ask me.

[Zoo_Dane]

4 hours ago, Isobel Harper said:

Couldn't co-dominance play a role?

Well he's saying there is one X-linked trait. He claims that females who have the trait on both chromosome will be able to hatch eggs, those with one (and men) cannot. That doesn't make any sense.

Without getting into genetics too much, thats not how it works. There are things called Barr-Bodies that inactivate one of the females two X chromosomes. So expression of both doesn't even come into play for any sort of co-dominant relationship. 

There would have to be two separate genes for riding dragons and hatching them. There's no genetic X-linked combination where only a female could hatch eggs whereas a male couldn't -- even if there were more than one gene.

Edited to clarify: in regards to X-linked traits; males either have the trait or do not (they only have one X chromosome so recessive/dominant doesn't factor); females either have the trait, don't have the trait, or are carriers of the trait (if the trait is recessive). 

[Gertrude]

Finally watched this and I have to say, no, I don't agree. I think PJ in general has some good observations and interesting insights, but when he tries to fit them all into an over-arching theory, it doesn't hold up well to scrutiny. It's not because he doesn't do his homework and it's not because he is wrong with any particular thing he says, it's because he makes a lot of assumptions. Like, a lot a lot. His theories are very specific based on very little solid evidence. Sure, it could be true, but it's based on such a weak base that if the books come out contradicting one of his assumptions then it all falls down. Everything is so complex and intertwined that it strains credulity. Where he really started to lose me is where he assumed people knew about the XX hatching power and schemed to marry and put people in place to give birth to X and XX targ kids. Really?

I think an affinity for dragon-riding is genetically linked to the dragon-lords somehow. That only a few families were dragon lords, could be a recent genetic mutation that gave them the affinity that few others had, or perhaps it was a magic ritual of bonding that is carried in the blood. I doubt GRRM sat down and figured out exactly how the genes would work and made sure to line all that up - I think it more likely that he had a vague idea that he wanted it to have a genetic component and that the riders and hatchings were dictated by plot. Need a dragon? Cool, let's hatch one (or three).

So yeah, dragon-affinity is probably (but not certainly) helped by genetics. Is it something GRRM has outlined and diagrammed? No.

[Ser Scott Malkinson]

11 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I think this is a classic example of people misunderstanding PJ (no offense). He doesn't create wild theories out of thin air and then bend and twist the text to fit (which certainly happens in A LOT of theories out there). He has theories that sound ridiculous at first, because they go against everything we think we know about the story, but if you actually listen to him it is 100% based on the text. Yes he can over-complicate sometimes, or read too much into particular lines of dialogue, but overall his theories are well-grounded in the text. That being said, there are videos of his that I watched several times and still didn't believe him. I think people get the impression they have to do mental gymnastics, which is the original impression I got from his vids, but if you really REALLY analyze his arguments, they are very well put together. I don't agree with him on everything, but I agree with him on most things.

Sure, he doesn't create his theories out of thin air, and that makes them more entertaining and plausible than your regular crackpot. But he certainly does pick from the text the parts that support his theory and ignores the parts that refute it. And not everything he says is 100% based on the text either (for example Brown Ben Plumm feeding the dragons, as WalkinDude mentioned).

I have a completely different experience watching Preston's vids than you do. When I first watch them, Preston's theories are really convincing (because Preston is really convincing, funny and great at explaining things), but once I start REALLY analyzing them, they fall apart. There are often some nuggets he finds that I haven't really thought of (half of Westeros being visited by the Iron Bank in Littlefinger's vids and the Brave Companions being Oberyn's sellsword company in the Dornish ones being some examples of this), so I still think it is worth checking out his theories if you want to learn something (or just if you want to be entertained).

 

17 hours ago, YOVMO said:

I see nothing about your excellent comment that is contradictory. I will remind you, however, that having Valyrian genes and having Dragon riding / hatching genes are not necessarily the same. Not all Valyrian's were dragon lords...in fact, the vast minority of them were and all but the Targaryen's were wiped out in the Doom. It is a stretch to suggest that people with non Targ Valyrian ancestry would have any connection to Dragonriders....not impossible, but you would need some kind of explanation.

My comment about Mellario being from a forrmer Valyrian colony was more of a joke to show how Preston would use this minor amount of information to show that Mellario had a dragon-X gene to pass down to Quentyn. I agree with you that she really wouldn't be able to ride a dragon, and doubt she has Valyrian traits at all. On the other hand, in this world all Europeans are descendants of Charlemagne already, and he lived only 1200 years ago. Therefore it seems that in aSoIaF at least half of Essos should be a descendant of a dragonlord since the freehold existed for 5000 years and even though the dragonlords were known for incest (at least the Targs were), they were also known for fucking around.

[devilish]

I don’t think that genes have anything to do with it. If that was the case, then any Targ who shared the same genes of the dragon rider would be able to ride the dragon anytime. However dragons had 1 rider per time and won’t accept any other rider until that dragon rider is dead.

We know that the ancient Valyrians used magic to control dragons.  The rest increased their chance with a trick known as imprinting (ie close proximity to the animal when it is born) or by trying to find somebody with the same character, shape and smell of the former dragon rider to try and recreate the bond between the old dragon and the dragon rider. Sometimes they managed, sometimes they failed to do so, hence the birth of wild dragons (most of whom had traits which made them difficult to live with other dragons or people)

That explains why Targs kept marrying one another and why they kept as many dragon eggs as possible close to their chest. If Starks or Lannisters got their hands over the eggs and they started to breed dragons who are loyal to them, then that would have been a tragedy for the Targs.

It is also possible for non Targs to ride dragons. Nettles had far less Targ ‘genes’ than Jacaeyrs Valeryan but she was able to tame a dragon. She did so by appeasing sheepstealer and luring herself into his good graces.

[AdesteFideles]

17 hours ago, WalkinDude said:

There's not going to be any flashback where we see Aliens landing on Planetos and altering proto-Valyrians.  That's the direction PJ is going, and he's been proven wrong about this by the Author.

Are we in for 15 videos explaining how it was all down to Lord Xenu and those nut-job Scientologists?

After my PJ mini-marathon yesterday, I wouldn't be surprised.

[WalkinDude]

5 hours ago, AdesteFideles said:

Are we in for 15 videos explaining how it was all down to Lord Xenu and those nut-job Scientologists?

After my PJ mini-marathon yesterday, I wouldn't be surprised.

I've watched every video of his.  He's a firm believer that Planetos is a post-apocalyptic world and Valyrians, COTF and the Others are all genetically engineered.  Glass Candles are advanced technology left over from an ancient alien race.  Same as Valyrian Steel.  

 

I appreciate what Preston does for the community, but he refuses to let go that this world isn't the remains of some super advanced society and still argues that Dany is the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna.  He's too committed to his ideas and won't abandon them even when it's obvious he's wrong.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

1 hour ago, WalkinDude said:

I've watched every video of his.  He's a firm believer that Planetos is a post-apocalyptic world and Valyrians, COTF and the Others are all genetically engineered.  Glass Candles are advanced technology left over from an ancient alien race.  Same as Valyrian Steel. 

ZOMG. So Preston's ultimate great theory is... "Martin is ripping off Gene Wolfe"? How anticlimactic.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 hour ago, WalkinDude said:

I've watched every video of his.  He's a firm believer that Planetos is a post-apocalyptic world and Valyrians, COTF and the Others are all genetically engineered.  Glass Candles are advanced technology left over from an ancient alien race.  Same as Valyrian Steel.  

 

I appreciate what Preston does for the community, but he refuses to let go that this world isn't the remains of some super advanced society and still argues that Dany is the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna.  He's too committed to his ideas and won't abandon them even when it's obvious he's wrong.

Planetos is in fact a post apocalyptic world if your consider the long night a form of apocalypse. And you are overstating his beliefs a bit. He has theorised that glass candles could be alien technology, but he doesn't base any theory on that hypothesis. And personally I think he's wrong about that one. And PJ ends every series by saying "once again, I'm probably wrong about half of this", so he is not super stubborn about his theories. And why can't Dany be the child of R+L? You can think that is incorrect, but to say you shouldn't even make the argument goes against the entire point of the forum.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

7 hours ago, devilish said:

I don’t think that genes have anything to do with it. If that was the case, then any Targ who shared the same genes of the dragon rider would be able to ride the dragon anytime. However dragons had 1 rider per time and won’t accept any other rider until that dragon rider is dead.

 

We know that the ancient Valyrians used magic to control dragons.  The rest increased their chance with a trick known as imprinting (ie close proximity to the animal when it is born) or by trying to find somebody with the same character, shape and smell of the former dragon rider to try and recreate the bond between the old dragon and the dragon rider. Sometimes they managed, sometimes they failed to do so, hence the birth of wild dragons (most of whom had traits which made them difficult to live with other dragons or people)

 

That explains why Targs kept marrying one another and why they kept as many dragon eggs as possible close to their chest. If Starks or Lannisters got their hands over the eggs and they started to breed dragons who are loyal to them, then that would have been a tragedy for the Targs.

 

It is also possible for non Targs to ride dragons. Nettles had far less Targ ‘genes’ than Jacaeyrs Valeryan but she was able to tame a dragon. She did so by appeasing sheepstealer and luring herself into his good graces.

 

You're making a hell of a lot of assumptions there without really backing them up. We don't know that ancient Valyrians used magic or even, frankly, that magic exists at all beyond the standard GRRM sci-fi devices of telepathy and telekinesis. Your explanation is a valid one, but I think it's a lot weaker than PJ's and lacks enough support from the text.

And yes, Nettles rode a dragon but likely never telepathically bonded with it, since she probably lacks the gene.

[WalkinDude]

13 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Planetos is in fact a post apocalyptic world if your consider the long night a form of apocalypse. And you are overstating his beliefs a bit. He has theorised that glass candles could be alien technology, but he doesn't base any theory on that hypothesis. And personally I think he's wrong about that one. And PJ ends every series by saying "once again, I'm probably wrong about half of this", so he is not super stubborn about his theories. And why can't Dany be the child of R+L? You can think that is incorrect, but to say you shouldn't even make the argument goes against the entire point of the forum.

I'm a Patreon supporter of his.  Have been for around 18 months.  Dany isn't the daughter of Rhaegar and Lyanna because the timelines don't match up.  I know Preston has gone over this, and he just dismisses the timeline saying that Jon was several months older than Robb and no one realized it.  It also doesn't answer why Viserys would lie to her or even keep her around.  He even blamed her for not being born early enough to marry Rhaegar.  Now Targaryen's have been in to some weird shit, but I can't think of any fathers marrying their daughters.

But that's not the primary reason.  We know that before Martin allowed HBO to make the show, he asked D&D who Jon's mother was.  He was satisfied with their answer.  The show has answered this question (not going to say how due to the show spoiler policy), but if they gave him an answer and followed through on that answer, you have to accept they answered Martin correctly. That means Lyanna isn't Dany's mother.  

Sure, Planetos has regressed in some way because the magic that once built the wall and was responsible for so much else is all but lost.  But that doesn't mean that the "magic" was from some ancient alien civilization.  It can just mean (like so many other of Preston's arguments on this topic) that magic was limited in who was taught and that certain agents (the Maesters, the faceless men) worked to eradicate the limited few who had access to arcane knowledge.  

Instead, Preston ignores that Martin said this was not a Sci-Fi story or part of his 1000 worlds, and continues to argue that the source behind everything is advanced alien technology.  He has a lot of great videos and I really enjoy most of them.  His Dorne series is spectacular and the best out there.  He's certainly more informed and able to put together well crafted videos probably more than any other YouTuber out there (save maybe Alt Shift X).  I just think he's barking up the wrong tree on this one and would do himself a service if he accepted he was wrong and tried to come up with a solution based on the text.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

9 hours ago, Gertrude said:

Finally watched this and I have to say, no, I don't agree. I think PJ in general has some good observations and interesting insights, but when he tries to fit them all into an over-arching theory, it doesn't hold up well to scrutiny. It's not because he doesn't do his homework and it's not because he is wrong with any particular thing he says, it's because he makes a lot of assumptions. Like, a lot a lot. His theories are very specific based on very little solid evidence. Sure, it could be true, but it's based on such a weak base that if the books come out contradicting one of his assumptions then it all falls down. Everything is so complex and intertwined that it strains credulity. Where he really started to lose me is where he assumed people knew about the XX hatching power and schemed to marry and put people in place to give birth to X and XX targ kids. Really?

I think an affinity for dragon-riding is genetically linked to the dragon-lords somehow. That only a few families were dragon lords, could be a recent genetic mutation that gave them the affinity that few others had, or perhaps it was a magic ritual of bonding that is carried in the blood. I doubt GRRM sat down and figured out exactly how the genes would work and made sure to line all that up - I think it more likely that he had a vague idea that he wanted it to have a genetic component and that the riders and hatchings were dictated by plot. Need a dragon? Cool, let's hatch one (or three).

So yeah, dragon-affinity is probably (but not certainly) helped by genetics. Is it something GRRM has outlined and diagrammed? No.

Again, (no offense) classic example of people misunderstanding PJ. You say he makes a lot of assumptions but that's really applying an unfair double standard. That's how these theories work. You come up with (assume) an explanation for something previously unexplained. Then you go back and read and see if it makes sense. He's not just assuming people knew about the XX hatching thing to fit details into his pet theory. No, he is coming up with an explanation for the actions of the faith and other characters that are otherwise lacking a reasonable explanation. Then he backs it up with evidence from the text. So, is this something that GRRM sat down and outlined? I'm betting yes, very likely. A lot of people think the idea of George sitting down and doing punnet squares is ridiculous. You know what is ridiculous? Writing one of the most complicated book series of all time with sometimes 5 or 6 years between books. The idea of him taking a day or 2 to make a diagram of the Targ family tree leading up to world of ice and fire release seems super reasonable in my opinion.

[Jon Fossoway]

I'm more into the lovecraftian twist: Planetos is a world formerly inhabited by magical races who were banished and/or destroyed or made a huge mess out of the planet, favoring the emergence of humans, latecomers. But whenever these humans came too close to the source of magic boom! hard reset (Long Night). The worldbook has so many HPL references, specially in the further east section, it's ridiculous. 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

11 minutes ago, WalkinDude said:

I'm a Patreon supporter of his.  Have been for around 18 months.  Dany isn't the daughter of Rhaegar and Lyanna because the timelines don't match up.  I know Preston has gone over this, and he just dismisses the timeline saying that Jon was several months older than Robb and no one realized it.  It also doesn't answer why Viserys would lie to her or even keep her around.  He even blamed her for not being born early enough to marry Rhaegar.  Now Targaryen's have been in to some weird shit, but I can't think of any fathers marrying their daughters.

But that's not the primary reason.  We know that before Martin allowed HBO to make the show, he asked D&D who Jon's mother was.  He was satisfied with their answer.  The show has answered this question (not going to say how due to the show spoiler policy), but if they gave him an answer and followed through on that answer, you have to accept they answered Martin correctly. That means Lyanna isn't Dany's mother.  

Sure, Planetos has regressed in some way because the magic that once built the wall and was responsible for so much else is all but lost.  But that doesn't mean that the "magic" was from some ancient alien civilization.  It can just mean (like so many other of Preston's arguments on this topic) that magic was limited in who was taught and that certain agents (the Maesters, the faceless men) worked to eradicate the limited few who had access to arcane knowledge.  

Instead, Preston ignores that Martin said this was not a Sci-Fi story or part of his 1000 worlds, and continues to argue that the source behind everything is advanced alien technology.  He has a lot of great videos and I really enjoy most of them.  His Dorne series is spectacular and the best out there.  He's certainly more informed and able to put together well crafted videos probably more than any other YouTuber out there (save maybe Alt Shift X).  I just think he's barking up the wrong tree on this one and would do himself a service if he accepted he was wrong and tried to come up with a solution based on the text.

The argument that D&D must have answered correctly and that the show must have gone the same way as the books is super weak. Especially considering how much they butchered books 4 and 5. And off the top of my head I don't remember his entire explanation for the timeline, but I remember that he provided an explanation I thought reasonable, and there are way more significant details in that theory. Like why is Edric Dayne named after Ned?

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

18 hours ago, Zoo_Dane said:

Right, but my whole point was that he misunderstands Mendelian genetics. If he's going to use that as an argument for a theory it needs to fit the science. It doesn't fit the science of Mendelian genetics as he proposes it. 

He doesn't misunderstand Mendelian genetics. His explanation is that this is sci-fi, and that super simplified Mendelian-esque genetics is at play. Obviously genetics is super complicated in real life. So it fits.

[WalkinDude]

1 minute ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

The argument that D&D must have answered correctly and that the show must have gone the same way as the books is super weak. Especially considering how much they butchered books 4 and 5. And off the top of my head I don't remember his entire explanation for the timeline, but I remember that he provided an explanation I thought reasonable, and there are way more significant details in that theory. Like why is Edric Dayne named after Ned?

The suspension of disbelief to accept that no one every suspected Jon was the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna is already astounding.  Ned arrives home with his sister's bones, who everyone believed was kidnapped and raped by Rhaegar, and a brand new baby and no one bats an eye.  That the Dayne's were involved in a coverup of sorts too, yet were stupid enough to risk the chance of naming the heir to Starfall "Ned" (yes, I know it's really Edric) is just too much.  Did that mad king joke around and call Jamie and Cersei "Waters" or "Hills"?  

Something happened at Starfall with Ned.  I don't know what, nor does anyone else.  I hope we learn more about House Dayne in the next book.  But Preston wants us to believe that Jon is the son of Brendan and Ashara and was conceived in the black cells of King's Landing, Dany was born at the Tower of Joy, and afterwards Ned took Jon back to Winterfell to raise Jon as his bastard.  Meanwhile the Dayne's somehow got Dany to Viserys and were able to convince him to tell a story about Dany being his sister.  That's a lot to expect of an 8 year old Viserys.

Not to mention that such actions would be a direct attack on Robert and the Iron Throne.  We can understand why Ned would lie to protect Jon if he was Lyanna's son.  But to risk his family being executed to hand over his "niece" to a crazy 8 year old Targaryen and rob Ashara of her son so he could raise Brandon's bastard in the North is just too much.  If Jon is the son of Ashara and Brendan, why lie?  He's already called Jon a bastard.  How is him being his bastard of a random serving girl a better story than Jon is the bastard son of my dead brother?  Meanwhile Varys was unable to learn of this great baby switch for 15 years?

 

 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

8 minutes ago, WalkinDude said:

The suspension of disbelief to accept that no one every suspected Jon was the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna is already astounding.  Ned arrives home with his sister's bones, who everyone believed was kidnapped and raped by Rhaegar, and a brand new baby and no one bats an eye.  That the Dayne's were involved in a coverup of sorts too, yet were stupid enough to risk the chance of naming the heir to Starfall "Ned" (yes, I know it's really Edric) is just too much.  Did that mad king joke around and call Jamie and Cersei "Waters" or "Hills"?  

Something happened at Starfall with Ned.  I don't know what, nor does anyone else.  I hope we learn more about House Dayne in the next book.  But Preston wants us to believe that Jon is the son of Brendan and Ashara and was conceived in the black cells of King's Landing, Dany was born at the Tower of Joy, and afterwards Ned took Jon back to Winterfell to raise Jon as his bastard.  Meanwhile the Dayne's somehow got Dany to Viserys and were able to convince him to tell a story about Dany being his sister.  That's a lot to expect of an 8 year old Viserys.

Not to mention that such actions would be a direct attack on Robert and the Iron Throne.  We can understand why Ned would lie to protect Jon if he was Lyanna's son.  But to risk his family being executed to hand over his "niece" to a crazy 8 year old Targaryen and rob Ashara of her son so he could raise Brandon's bastard in the North is just too much.  If Jon is the son of Ashara and Brendan, why lie?  He's already called Jon a bastard.  How is him being his bastard of a random serving girl a better story than Jon is the bastard son of my dead brother?  Meanwhile Varys was unable to learn of this great baby switch for 15 years?

 

 

I don't know what Ned thought would happen to Dany exactly but I don't think he thought she would be passed off as real Dany and attached to Viserys. I think that's why he is constantly haunted by his promise to Lyanna in AGOT. Frankly I don't have a great explanation for why he lied about Jon's parentage but that doesn't make the theory not true. I will concede it is a mark against it. Along the same lines, R+L=J does not explain the trip to Starfall, the significance of Brandon and Ashara's romance, the naming of Ned Dayne, or the lack of lemon trees in Braavos. So while B+A=J leaves a couple things unexplained, I think R+L=J leaves even more things unexplained.