@Australopithecus:
Your conclusions are based on incorrect information. Ryuma did NOT slay the dragon at Wa, and neither did the dragon terrorize Wa. He did so at another island, in which he happened to be. Read monsters again, and pay attention this time.
I said that Oda "fused" both stories as said by him in the SBS. Looks like you haven't been paying attention yourself
D: Question for you!! Is the swordsman "Ryuma" who was once said to have defeated a dragon the very same Ryuma that starred in the short story "Monsters" from your collection volume entitled "Wanted!"? He is, isn't he? I'm so desperate to know, I can't brush my teeth. If I get a cavity, I'll tell the dentist it was your fault.P.N. Satoru-pyon
D: Greetings!! I cracked open "Wanted!" for the first time in ages and re-read "Romance Dawn", which prompted me to notice that Luffy's grandpa in that story was basically the same guy as Vice Admiral Garp! Does that mean that Garp was once the captain of a crew of pirates? P.N. Nao
O: Well, here are two questions about my old short story collection, "Wanted!" I'll tackle Ryuma's first. The zombie Ryuma appears in Chapter 450 from this volume, and he is indeed the Ryuma who starred in "Monsters". In the world of One Piece, he's now a legendary swordsman who died of sickness. I wouldn't have minded if this had just slipped through the cracks, but I was happy to see that so many people noticed. Next, Garp. He appeared as Luffy's grandpa, and a pirate no less, in the one-shot that served as the basis for One Piece. He might look the same, but I want you to see these as different stories. Grandpa Garp from THIS One Piece is a true blue Marine, from birth till death!!
If Oda is planning to give Ryuma a background like I think he should then it's possible he could use the same story.
Furthermore, when Flare, the girl who had her village burned to a crisp by the dragon Ryuma later slayed, was absorbed in her fear of dragons, Ryuma showed no ‘hate’, ‘grudge’, ‘anger’, ‘fear’ or any such feeling. Instead, he was wondering about its scariness.
http://i.imgur.com/O8ongir.png
Someone who had suffered the tragic attacks of a dragon or dragons at Wa would not be asking such question since the answer to it would have been known through his experience. So your surmise about the possibility that the people of Wa ‘hate’ dragons because their country gets attacked by dragons does not hold.
Correct me if I'm wrong but that statement is made by Ryuma himself, it certainly does not account for all the population.
The samurai at Wa are known to be very strong that not even the marines approach their country. When Ryuma killed that dragon, he did so without any trouble. It goes to show how strong his brethren are. Not only that but they were also shown to be able to use ‘hardening haki’. So defending themselves from a dragon should be a walk in the park.
Not only that, but Kinemon himself had no trouble whatsoever handling that tough dragon at Punk Hazard.
http://i.imgur.com/gA710j3.png
With such man around, his wife has nothing to fear of dragons
Debatable, Haki wasn't always known to eveyone, and if all the samurais know Haki, then so should Ryuma. And yet he wasn't shown using something remotely close to that when he faced Zoro. Just shows how much you're assuming things.And we don't know if the dragons in PH are as strong as the real deal, they're artificial after all.
That’s CCC’s translation. It’s unquestionably reliable.
Nothing is more reliable than the original Japanese text sadly.
It is completely uncalled for to use sarcasm against your interlocutors. If you read thoroughly and paid attention to what I had said, you would not be asking such questions because they have already been answered in my theory, unless you had trouble understanding what I said.
Lol oh I read it and I find it really shallow. It's not based on facts just on your interpretation of events. And I merely came up with my own interepretation which is my right.
This is not ‘Swiss cheese’ we're talking about. When you make claims, be sure to elaborate and back them up.
I already did but looks like you're deliberatly ignoring them, along with the fact that we don't have the full story.
Yes, that’s flying, as well. It is called ‘flying against his will’.
You seem to hold some bizarre notions about flying.
Birds, bugs, planes, helicopters, and spacecrafts all use different methods of ‘flying’, yet they ‘fly’ nonetheless.
I was merely describing the mechanics, but sure you can continue to be a wise ass if that pleases you.
The idea that I had in mind was that Momo stood in Kaido’s way irreverently for some reason, and Kaido decided to either test his resolve or teach Momo to fear him by grabbing him and flying.
And that's supposed to be more convincing than what I said? What you're saying is that Kaido would be so easily angred by a small slight like that, that he would go out of his way to chase the samurais, not to mention he would literally traumatize a small child, just because he stepped in his way? I find that too much tbh.And it doesn't really fit with what was shown of his personality, he's a Yonko who wants to drag the world into war because he's bored, Momo and the samurai are nothing more than flies to him.
Many people agree with this theory not just ‘two’. Anybody with fundamental understanding of arithmetic can tell that much. You have made it abundantly clear to us that you are a hater of the theory.
I'm simply not convinced by it,which is understandable. We're all here to discuss the manga,we're bound to disagree on certain topics, and the goal is not to convince everyone, but maybe come closer to the truth while discussing it. But I can tell that you sure like all the praise, and that you treat people differently depending whether or not they liked your theory.
I connected many points in One Piece that are shrouded in mystery, and created a logical pattern. I supported everything I said by other events in the manga, whereas everything you say is based merely on wrong information, attention deficiency, prejudice against my theory, poor reasoning, stipulative usage of definitions and so forth. Even if what you said had been true, which is not, it would have been ‘inductively very weak’. My theory is cogent. Nothing of what you have said debunked anything in my theory. I allow you the freedom to carp as much as it takes, but it won’t change a thing because when I was creating this theory, I was also inquiring into the sense and credibility of every interpretation, connection, and conclusion I made.
Oh all hail Australopithecus, the guy who holds the truth about Kaido, even though we know nothing of his abilities, or we don't have a clear idea of the events that happened in the past in Wano. The fact is there is more than one way to interpret these events, just like there is more than one theory concerning Kaido's power. Anyone can connect the dots, but I often find that these people tend to look at things on the surface. Kin'emon hates dragons, he is being chased by DD and Kaido, hence Kaido is a dragon. It's a bit too predictable.When other elements show that there could be another valid theory, based on Kaido's appearance, as well as Momotaro's story that seems to be a great source of inspiration for Oda. The parallels between Momonosuke and Momotaro are too big to be ignored. Other things like the Admirals, Onigashima can be seen as clues. In the end him being an Oni fits more in that theme than let's say a dragon.
Don't worry I'm not gonna bother too much because clearly you are prejudiced against people who don't agree with you. Too bad I really thought it was well written, but you don't seem to have what it takes to really discuss this, you always try to belittle others opinions, and like to use fancy words to prove that you're the real deal. Well no matter how much you try to make it sound believable it if it's shallow it doesn't really help.And I can tell that you're not really open to theories other than your own, so why bother?
On this note, Sarabada!