Sorry, Mr Ares, but that is just plain dead wrong.

Considering that my post was supposed to clarify an argument put forward by another poster and was not an argument with which I agreed (and my post specifically stated that I didn't agree) the only way I would be wrong would be if I misinterpreted bjclinton's argument. And that does not appear to be the case. So, are you sorry for me clarifying bjclinton's position? Are you saying sorry to me because you think bjclinton's argument is wrong? Or did you not read my post properly and think you were shooting down my theory?

 

2.It is stated that six gholam were made, but only one is known to be around (I think this one was found in a stasis box), so evidently the others were destroyed or died/deteriorated. I don't recall any mention of how any of the other five were destroyed.

Who said they were destroyed? If one gholam was found in a stasis box, why can't the other five be in other stasis boxes? They could be inaccessible rather than destroyed/dead/etc.

Or did you not read my post properly and think you were shooting down my theory?

 

LOL ... actually, thats exactly it.  I did mention, too, that I didn't read everything ...

 

But yes, having gone back now, I do see that you were merely clarifying someone else's argument.  Apologies, and all that.

 

OhhighlyrespectedWurukattegeriatricgodofbattleandexplainerofotherpeoplespositions.