Talk:Theories:Items

Cleanup Notes

In case anybody has any questions about why information was moved out of the "Evidence" column: the evidence column is for evidence from canon sources only. Non-canon evidence, as well as base reasoning, belongs in the comment column. Basically, if you can't cite an episode or a graphic novel, it belongs in Comments, not Evidence. See Help:Theories and Spoilers.

If you feel information which was moved is supported by a canon source, please be sure to cite the specific example from a graphic novel or episode if you move the information back to the Evidence column. Also, "None" in the evidence column isn't a value judgment. Many theories which will probably end up true don't have specific information from episodes or graphic novels which can be cited at present. Please don't take it as a slight on your theory -- it's merely to make the tables consistent.--Hardvice (talk) 01:36, 11 February 2007 (EST)

I see this occuring a few times:

In Distractions, Isaac tells Simone he has seen what Peter can 
do, referring to the explosion.

Unless Isaac's ability has changed significantly, allowing him to remember what he's seen, this must be just an assumption on his part. When Peter first uses Isaac's ability they have a discussion about how they don't know anything beyond what they've painted.

• No, Isaac tells Hiro and Ando in the BTD that he painted a picture of a man exploding. He does remember. He seems to remember some of his paintings (such as the explosion "we have to stop it").--Bob 13:17, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Notice the past tense, he is going by what he saw when he came out of his prognostic trance. We don't even know for sure that the picture is of an exploding man, It could be just a man that looks like he is exploding. The explosion may not even be a man, but a man that sets off an explosion. We just don't know.--WolvenSpectre 13:28, 18 April 2007 (EDT)