HOME | DD
Creshosk β Crash Course - Genetics
Published: 2011-07-31 19:50:43 +0000 UTC; Views: 15242; Favourites: 193; Downloads: 564
Redirect to original
Description
Continuation of the Lesson on Alicorn OCs Part 1:[link] .Full Pinkie Pie vector by
Fluttershy Vector by
Doctor Whooves Vector by
Filly Celestia and Filly Luna picture by
Well this has certainly pissed the trolls off. :iconthundercrashshrug: I'm okay with that. I knew that it would. So what the matter trolls? U mad?
It's hilarious that some people are ACTUALLY arguing:
Paraphrased: "You cant do things that are non-canon, but I can."
They must be getting really pissed off.
Apparently I pissed of a Nazi calling themself "JessicaBlood" into "trolling" me. Haha...
They didn't understand the basic concept of multiversal theory when laid out for them... course nobody ever said nazi's were bright.
And the idiots are still letting me troll them. It's hilarious. :trollfacplz:
Related content
Comments: 237
Oh right you only saw two episodes . Nope tiwlight has teleported, and made things materialize. Through her unicorn magic.
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay, has there been any other unicorn shown that could do that?
(Oh and thanks for bearing with me there.)
π: 0 β©: 1
To cast spells onscreen? Any unicorn other than sweetie belle.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, when you put it that way, your theory does make more sense. I see your point and how you can defend your alicorn OC pretty well. Alicorns may not be commonplace in canon but this isn't canon.
π: 0 β©: 1
There just needs to be some sort of happy medium between canon and fanon, which, unfortunately, is almost impossible.
π: 0 β©: 1
They're called "Personal Fanon". Rather than the group think fanon which is unstable and inconsistant. EAch individual when they create their own characters they create their own world that that character came form which only matches canon and fanon as much as the creator of the fanfictional work chooses.
Me for example I think that dinky being derpy's daughter and derpy and the doctor being together is cute. So I've accepted those parts of the group think canon into my personal fanon.
Likewise an alternate version of my Thunder Crash as just a pegasus was accpeted into another person's personal fanon.
These personal fanons have no effect on either the official canon nor the group think fanon. They themselves are in alternate realities.
π: 0 β©: 1
I see you point. I always felt the same with my OCs. Unfortunately, quite a people don't like to see it that way. I understand where they're coming from, I just don't agree with it.
π: 0 β©: 1
I generally don't see their point, because other wise the fans couldn't do anything. Because no matter how close a fanwork seems to the canon material, it's not canon, because it's not in continuity with the official canon. It really is a boolean function, either it is canon or it is not. Anything time 0 is 0. Ergo non-canon that's close to canon is just as canon as something that's not close to canon.
π: 0 β©: 1
Exactly. I think what they try to do is show that someone should follow canon as closely as possible, even if they can't make it completely canon. People tend to see OCs as a character who just wasn't in the canon but could be. So, everyone says an alicorn OC isn't possible because it isn't in the canon.
But, as we said before, anything involving an OC isn't canon anyway.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, and since they'll never be canon there's no real point to forcing people to try. I say so long as they're not hurting anyone let them do what they want.
π: 0 β©: 1
good job again creshosk ^^
π: 0 β©: 0
I like the idea, defending the existence of other alicorn OCs.
However,
Your numbers seem entirely arbitrary and whose only purpose seem to be to give you something to show people as well as somehow explaining that Luna and Tia are exceptional due to a perfect blend.
There is no such existence of this DNA canon-wise. Lauren Faust herself has stated that any mixture of parents can yield any possible type of pony.
However, first there is the canon fact that Luna and Tia are the only two alicorns.
Your Theory is based entirely on fanon, such as the idea that Dinky is the daughter of Derpy/Ditzy and that it was Dr.Whooves (though in some cases they say it's Pokey) who sired her.
As such, your theory only applies to the fanon you create as well as anybody who follows the fanon.
Now... there is some rather... crude... reasoning that you use here. As well as just plain racism.
Mongloid, Caucazoid, and Negroid?
I'm sorry sir, but this is the 21st century and we know how genetics actually operate.
One is not more black, asian or white depending on your DNA, there is only one gene that controls the pigments of one's skin, not a majority that all say, hey I'm black.
There's also the whole, hey I have Earth pony DNA so I act like an Earth pony.
DNA has no affect on one's personality or character.
Just because one is Japanese doesn't mean one is honorable and hard working.
Just cause someone is african-american, doesn't mean (please forgive me for this stereotype) that they like chicken and watermelons.
Canon will always rule over fanon, and no amount of reasoning, whether sound or completely foolish will change that.
π: 0 β©: 2
It's not just skin pigment, and its not racist. that would imply some level of bias in the statement and saying that one is superior to the other. They're not. No race is better or worse, they're just differant. It also refers to things such as the epicthanthic folds, or the exact facial structure as well as what hair and eye color is more likely to occur. or even the average white blood cell counts.
I'm not going to be PC apologist on the fact that the classifications that we put in place have genetic backing. a tendency to have more of one sert of genes than another.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ahh, excellent, some good hard science.
Yes there are some physical characteristics that are most common within different ethnic groups.
This is a very true fact of genetics.
However it was not this that I was saying was racist.
What is racist is placing personality traits and character into genetics. People do not like the things they do because of genetics.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm also going to advise that you as well read the study on the domestication of foxes published by National geographic if you truly beleive that not a single gene can have any sort of influence on behavior.
π: 0 β©: 1
There is a difference between behavior and personality.
This family has a tendency to be hyperactive, and there is a gene they all have in common that causes this. (Possible)
This girl likes books because she has a book gene (Ignorance)
π: 0 β©: 1
How do you know that there is not a gene that the scientists can refer to as a "book gene" Perhaps its a chemical that provides an elevated positive chemicle response to the stimulii of the smells found in the combonation of paper and ink?
They do tend to give "cute" nicknames to genes so they don't have to say things like rather than saying "POK erythroid myeloid ontogenic factor" They can refer to it as "Pokemon" from "POK erythroid myeloid ontogenic factor"
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't know that there isn't.
But are you ready to deny any possibility of free will by saying that everything we do is determined by genes?
π: 0 β©: 1
I didn't say that either. But I know better than to say "We're not chemically controlled by the chemicles we're made up of."
Having only one X chromosome and one Y chromosome, my body tends to produce more testaosterone than estrogen, and accordingly my testosterone receptors tend to be more active than if the reverse had been true. And I'm sure you're aware that testosterone can also have an effect on one's behavior.
π: 0 β©: 1
Your theme seems to be finding exceptions and presenting them as the basis of your case.
Testosterone can affect one's behavior. But that once again ignores my pretense that behavior and personality are not essentially the same thing.
Two males can have completely different personalities despite both producing more testosterone than estrogen.
And here's the clincher.
Two identical twins can have completely different personalities despite having the same exact genes.
π: 0 β©: 1
You know nothing of horomones or gentic traits that effect horomone production I take it. I'm not saying personality, I'm saying behavior. Like the research on domesticatic foxes where within a few generations of just breeding foxes they got a generation of foxes that without behavior modification were acting like domesticated dogs.
π: 0 β©: 1
The domestication of animals to make them less aggressive to humans, how all animals have been domesticated in most cases, doesn't make it any more true that genes affect personality.
Behavior and Personality are two different things.
π: 0 β©: 1
You know you keeping on the personality thing is a strawman right?
Care to show me where I said personality? Because I'm pretty sure I've been saying behaviour.
π: 0 β©: 0
I'm affraid Im going to once again point you to the first half of this.
π: 0 β©: 1
First half of what? the image?
I believe you refer to the section in which you say that DNA is the building blocks of all life.
This is true. In our universe, and as far as we know.
Now... assuming that Equestria does indeed lie in a universe that observes the same laws of DNA as ours, then your theory does have a base. The actual numbers given as well as the chosen racial issues aside.
However, this is not a fact nor even hinted to be true in canon.
All that is canon regarding pony bodies is that every pony, not just unicorns and alicorns, have magic in their body.
Just this face alone makes it even less likely that they're bodies operate on the same basis as ponies that gallop around on our planet. What's to say that Twilight Sparkle is even a carbon-based life form.
Just because something is true within humanity's experience. Doesn't mean that it's true in all existence.
Especially given the whole alternate reality thing of infinite universes.
I believe you yourself even pointed to it for reasoning.
π: 0 β©: 1
This is the first half to which I refer: [link]
OF course this explaination is "non-canon" just about all fanart is non-canon.
Secondly. I've never enouctered any Flying horses, let alone sentient ones that can cast magical spells.
I'm going to have to venture a guess that we do not share a 100% similarity. However we can only use ours as the basis to fill in what is not provided for in our observations and use our observations as an override for anything that we have in the foundation.
Because you also cannot say that nothing at all works similar to the way it does here, Point of fact, gravity seems to be in effect in that world for example. As well as some of the thermal dynamics. Rainbow Dash did say that it gets colder the higher up you go.
So throwing out all of our science simply because its not our universe is just as much fallacy as saying that everything is the same. As obviously, neither is the case.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've already referred to your Alternate Reality post in my first large response.
In the theory of infinite realities then there is of course one that follows your theory to the letter.
There is no reason to say that the universe of MLP:FiM is this universe.
But there is a reason to say that it is not. Simply because Canon states that Luna and Celestia are the only Alicorns.
The canon of previous generations of Pony does not change this. G1's canon has nothing to do with G4's canon. That's like saying Transformer's the Movie shares the same canon as Transformers (directed by Michael Bay).
I am not saying that just because it's a different reality means that non of our science doesn't apply. This is how humanity learns, by applying what we know to the unknown. However, until proven true it is just a Theory. And all theories will receive criticism. It is up to the theorizer to recognize the critiques and respond appropriately, being open to change.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not saying its the same exact universe as the manestream MlP:FiM universe, it is however withing the same multiverse, as is g1.
I'm not saying that my alicorn is canon, I'm pointing out how he's not.
Canon only refers to the manestream universe. Anyhting that happens that is not in canon is not within that universe. Your pony included.
You've already said that if the first part is applied the second part holds true. Since I've already indicated that this is the second half that cannot exist without the first half, it is intellectually dishonest to try and separate them. It's like taking something out of context. Without the context the entire piece is tainted.
I have never once said that this was canon and never will. That's why when people talking about it being non-canon I will refer them to the part that they are ignoring.
It's like presenting a math equation 1=2 Without the first half 1+1=2.
Or rather in this case getting on my case for saying that 1=2 when its leaving out that I said that 1+1=2.
So what is it you hope to acheive here anyway?
ITs almost like getting on a persons case for pairing off rainbow dash and anygiven other pony because They think that Zuko is the better firebender.
It's nonsequiter to separate the first from the second.
π: 0 β©: 1
What makes you say that it's in the same multiverse? What makes it a multiverse, in a reality of infinity realities none are grouped, everything is the multiverse.
Yes, you're OC is not Canon, nobody's is. But neither is your OC, or any Alicorn (for the moment) considered fanon. That is why people have a problem with it.
Canon denotes material accepted as "official", that doesn't make it mainstream. Even canon can be hipster
You take my words out of order, I merely stated that your 2nd theory only holds true if it's based off your first theory. The problem with that being that your basing a 2nd incredibly flawed theory (It only holds true to exact conditions) on a first flawed theory (that the MLPs have any connection and that there were alicorns, not animation errors)
Though problem isn't that it's not canon, it's that it's not fanon either. Fanon is based off of canon.
What I am trying to do here is explain to you why everypony hates alicorn OCs.
Also I lol-ed at the ZuTara shippers as soon as Legend of Korra was announced.
Kinda feel bad that their portion of fanon was destroyed though.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, everything is the omniverse. A multiverse is a categroical classification of like universes, the MLP multiverse would be a multiverse that contains the MLP universes. This is not an MLP universe as there are no real MLP here, so this and the X-Men and Zelda fall out of the MLP universe and within their own. It is possible for there to be overlap like a venn diagram where a universe or set of universes would fall into multiple universes. Like a crossover. Toph Neighfong is in the ATLA multiverse for having Toph and the MLP Multiverse for being a pony.
And My Oc is my personal Fanon. There exists the shared fanon as well as individual fanons. As Your OC exists within a continuity where you control the timestream and Mine exists in mine, but neither is in the mane fanon where Derp came from.
Canon is a continuity. even "official" As before Baby surprise is not canon, but at the same time she is canon. She's always official though unless she appears in an individual's fanon in which case anything she does is non-canon in that fanon.
She is canon to g1, not to g4, as rainbow dash is canon to g3 and not canon to g3 but to g3.5 and not canon to 3.5 and canon to g4 and not canon to g4
Each g indicator of course indicating a different grouping as g3.5 rainbow dash was an earth pony equvilent of zhazha gabor where as g4 rainbow dash in her canon whihc is non-canon to g3.5 is a tomboy pegasus.
So you see you can't use "canon" to mean "official" as there are ponys who are official but non-canon.
Animation errors can't be official? Poor Derpy.
It doesn't matter if its official. Your OC isn't official, fanon isn't official.
And regardless if it was based off of an error it was still depicted. Which means that in one of the universes in the mlp multiverse they existed. even if the wrong universe was shown breifly... multiple times...for an extended period of time. It still happened.
Could you imagine if they'd decided not to shift the timestream to canon-ize Derpy? then the derpy eyes would be a non-canon thing that just didnt occur.
But they did, the decided to shift the
timestream to canonize derpy.
How is he not based off of canon?
Pony? Check
Special Talent? Check
Cutie mark indicating his special talent? Check
If he wasn't based off of canon then he would have none of those things that are canon.
I don't care why they have the prejudicial racial bias toward hatred they have, I'm explaining why they shouldn't.
Nah, the zutarians are alive and well, I've noticed they're a stubborn bunch that more readily understand multiversal theory. They don't care if its non-canon they're happy in their own little realities.
π: 0 β©: 1
You really do enjoy taking other people's words and turning them around to suit your own needs don't you?
Worst kind of person to ty to have an intelligent conversation with. Rather than compromising any lost points they continue to misconstrue the points of the other to support their own.
π: 0 β©: 1
Like pushing "There's a difference between personality and behaviour"
When I've been saying behavior all along?
I guess you're admiting you're the worse kind of person tohave an intelligent conversation with?
I'd have to disagree. I don't think you're a troll. Those are the worse kind to try and have an intelligent conversation with.
I'll ask you again however: What are you trying to accomplish?
π: 0 β©: 0
Ah yes. The elusive Unified Pony Theory.
For a while Equestria seemed to have less biomass than expected. Ponies looked everywhere, but could not find it. It all came together when a new type of biomass, one which attracted far greater attention to itself that would otherwise be expected, was proposed.
We call it "Derp Matter".
π: 0 β©: 0
Read the first part please, out of context always destroys information.
π: 0 β©: 1
Generation 3? Sop trolling
π: 0 β©: 2
Your ignorant use of a term proves your intentions.
π: 0 β©: 1
What I'm giving you is a critique. Something to try help and IMPROVE your knowledge. Trolling is something different. You want a dictionary response? Alright, you determine what I'm doing.
Critique:
verbβ/kriΛtΔk/β
critiqued, past participle;βcritiqued, past tense;βcritiques, 3rd person singular present;βcritiquing, present participle
Evaluate (a theory or practice) in a detailed and analytical way
- the authors critique the methods and practices used in the research
nounβ/kriΛtΔk/β
critiques, plural
A detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory
Trolling: troll
verbβ
trolled, past participle;βtrolled, past tense;βtrolling, present participle;βtrolls, 3rd person singular present
Fish by trailing a baited line along behind a boat
- we trolled for mackerel
Search for something
- a group of companies trolling for partnership opportunities
Sing (something) in a happy and carefree way
- troll the ancient Yuletide carol
Send (an e-mail message or posting on the Internet) intended to provoke a response from the reader by containing errors
Walk; stroll
- we all trolled into town
π: 0 β©: 1
Send (an e-mail message or posting on the Internet) intended to provoke a response from the reader by containing errors
Thank you for proving my point.
And blatently attacking proves the intent.
π: 0 β©: 2
By your use of that definition to prove your own stance you are also calling emails to authors by professional editors and publishers outlining errors within their prospective books as trolling.
π: 0 β©: 1
Im not the one who posted that definition. but it is A definition.
It's more the blatent attack that's the trolling.
π: 0 β©: 1
You may not be the one who posted the definition. but you responded by quoting it.
π: 0 β©: 1
And yet it still holds true. Thunder Crash is not a gary stu. He's not the best at everything, but neither is he the worst. I think he's cool yes, or else I would not have created him, however, much like most of the others I've created he's not what I would want to be either.
I'd want to be just a unicorn with a talent for elementally affiliated magic. I dont really care about illusion spells or transmogrification or making mustaches appear. I'd be happy being able to manipulate the mystical (or even the periodical) elements.
So since he's not my ideal, nor is he the worst or best at everything, he cant be a Gary Stu. Being different from what has been seen is insufficient to fit the definition. As that would mark every OC as a gary stu. Which is rather unfair and indicates a lack of imagination on the one doing the labeling. Bit of jealousy in that sentiment really.
π: 0 β©: 1
This is all very true.
But the thing is, Alicorns are Gods in canon.
Whether or not your alicorn is a god is a point of fanon, and fanon will never supersede canon.
which is what makes any and all alicorns Gary Stus or Mary Sues.
Unless the show itself shows an alicorn that is not a god then all OC alicorns are Gary Stu/Mary Sue.
π: 0 β©: 1
"Canon" has no real weight in this argument. OR else I'm just going to have to keep pointing you to the first part where this is established to be non-canon.
Saying "You can't do things that are non-canon" is even more hypocritical coming from you. I mean no offense but can you show me where your OC occurs in canon? Since he doesn't exist in canon then wouldn't the canon of his non existence override the fanon of his existence? Ergo shouldn't you not be making ANY OC since none of them would exist in canon?
also wouldn't that also axe out anthing non-canon both positive and negative that the canon character do since they haven't done it in canon? All the scootabuse and scootalove and ALL of the shipping whether its homo or heterosexual?
Since its noncanon and such behavior doesn't exist in the canon thus far?
And no, Again that is prejudicial and frankly as ignorant as saying that all black men are uneducated or that all White people are uneducated or that all asian people are uneducated.
It also shows a cwertain level of ignorance with the term gary stu to bandy it about on things that dont qualify.
Tell me, why would a non-canon alicorn OC HAVE to be a god? I've already shown that in non-canon universes such alicorns existed within MLP. Baby Surprise is non-canon to FiM And she's not a goddess.
π: 0 β©: 1
Barring the ludicrousy of saying that canon doesn't matter, I will address your other points.
I did not say that one can not do things that are non-canon. One can do whatever the buck they want, but they should not expect others to acknowledge their decisions as correct nor should they believe their decisions to be more important than canon.
My OC is my ponysona, I use him to interact with other fans through various mediums, I will never write him into canon. If he were to ever be written into fan work then it'd be so obviously fanon that no one would accuse him of trying to supersede canon.
My OC also follows the outline canon has given so far, he does not contradict any absolutely No's, unlike alicorn OCs or OCs faster than Dash or more powerful with magic than Twilight. Based on Canon, he could exist.
Yes, it does axe out anything and everything created by fans. My fanfics are complete BS because Scootaloo hasn't grownup nor does she have any real relationship with Dash, thus far.
I don't quite know what you refer to in this section, regarding prejudicial and ignorance, based on my previous comment then it would make sense that it refer to my comment about all alicorns (Luna and Celestia) being gods.
This is not prejudicial, or ignorant. It is a fact of the canon that Luna and Celestia are the only alicorns and that they are gods.
Alicorn OCs don't have to be gods, but it is canon that alicorns are gods. If they were to be gods then they would be Gary/Mary. Thus concluding that Alicorn OCs just don't work.
Baby Surpise is not fanon, she is a canon character from the first generation of MLP. A generation that was plagued with animation lapses such as horns appearing on pegasi and such. Official artwork of Baby Surprise shows her as an Pegasus Pony, not an alicorn, official artwork of Fizzy shows her as an unicorn not an alicorn. Animation errors happen, that doesn't make it canon. Or do you believe that Lyra is an Earth Pony because she has appeared in some scenes without a horn.
G1 is not canon to MLP:FiM, but it isn't fanon either. It's not related by anything other than name.
π: 0 β©: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>