Revan and the Unbalancing of the Galaxy Feat

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
How? If it was just 41 then we'd have them commiting their actions in 41 and Anakin being born in the same year. How does that not make sense?

Okay, I'll explain it slowly.

For this explanation, let's assume the meditation took place in 41.0 BBY.

If Anakin Skywalker was born in 41.9 BBY, that means that he was born .9 years before it even happened.

That's how the BBY / ABY system works.

What you're thinking is that the 0.9 is factoring in the gestation. Two things:

a.) If factoring in the gestation, it would be around 0.7, not 0.9, since the twelve months are condensed to ten units.

b.) Anakin Skywalker would then have to be born 40.3 BBY, assuming standard gestation and the meditation being 41.0 BBY.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Likewise, I respect you too. The problem is, you haven't proven any of this.

I've spent the past several minutes peeking at every Star Wars related timeline that's available and it all comes back to the same place:

Anakin was born in 41 BBY and the Yinchorri uprising took place in 33 BBY and that's approximately 8 years that separate those events, which is the time Plagueis assigns for the ritual.

In addition to being a good novelist, Luceno is known for a very refined sense of Star Wars continuity. He made the circumstances of Anakin's birth in relation to that ritual a pivotal element of that book.

The only contradiction is the one you've manufactured.

Gideon, I already explained this.

Anakin Skywalker = born 41.9 BBY

The meditation = sometime between 41.5 BBY and 41.0 BBY.

Thus, Anakin was born prior to it happening.

You're ignoring the decimals, but they're extremely important.

I explained how I got the decimals already, too.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
The meditation = sometime between 41.5 BBY and 41.0 BBY.

{This is a critical part of your argument and you actually haven't proven it.}

I already addressed it.

Again, The New Essential Chronology attributes either a 0.0 or a 0.5 decimal point to non-battle dates.

For proof of this, refer to all of the data entries of the modern era, and you will see them being used.

The lack of usage of a 0.5 decimal (and thus having 31.5) means that it took place closer to 31.0.

And how do we know when exactly in 33 BBY the Yinchorri Crisis began? The exact dating of that within is never specified, if it wasn't specified when in 41 BBY Anakin was born, it would go down as 41 BBY instead of 41.9 BBY.

There's a difference between 33 BBY and 33.0 BBY, and that difference is ambiguity vs precision. Unless you want to assume that the date given for any event doesn't have some decimal point before it means that it took place at the exact turn of the year, in which case the Star Wars timeline would be pretty weird and absurd lol

Edit: nm, but it's still roughly eight years. I doubt anyone who writes a novel is obligated to say, ____ happened 8 years, 36 days, 7 hours, 3 minutes, and 27.69 seconds after this event

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Okay, I'll explain it slowly.

For this explanation, let's assume the meditation took place in 41.0 BBY.

If Anakin Skywalker was [b]born in 41.9 BBY, that means that he was born .9 years before it even happened.

That's how the BBY / ABY system works.

What you're thinking is that the 0.9 is factoring in the gestation. Two things:

a.) If factoring in the gestation, it would be around 0.7, not 0.9, since the twelve months are condensed to ten units.

b.) Anakin Skywalker would then have to be born 40.3 BBY, assuming standard gestation and the meditation being 41.0 BBY. [/B]

But we have no reason to assume that because it's never said. It just says the meditation took place 8 years before 33 meaning sometime in 41.

But who's to say Shmi carried Anakin for the full term? And as I pointed out the dates your using to support this are only "approximate" and likely up for debate if they contradict a major event within the continuity.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
But we have no reason to assume that because it's never said. It just says the meditation took place 8 years before 33 meaning sometime in 41.

But who's to say Shmi carried Anakin for the full term? And as I pointed out the dates your using to support this are only "approximate" and likely up for debate if they contradict a major event within the continuity.

She would merely have to carry him for 0.1 years (like two months) for my point to be fact, in which I'll take the chances.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I already addressed it.

Again, The New Essential Chronology attributes either a 0.0 or a 0.5 decimal point to non-battle dates.

For proof of this, refer to all of the data entries of the modern era, and you will see them being used.

The lack of usage of a 0.5 decimal (and thus having 31.5) means that it took place closer to 31.0.

So because the specific date wasn't listed in the novel we assume between 0.0-0.5 because of some sourcebook that was likely referring only to dates listed within its own pages? :/

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I factored that into my calculation by giving them a full year time span.

She would merely have to carry him for 0.1 years (like two months) for my point to be fact, in which I'll take the chances.

Then it's not conclusive.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
So because the specific date wasn't listed in the novel we assume between 0.0-0.5 because of some sourcebook that was likely referring only to dates listed within its own pages? :/

No.

TNEC provides specific dates down to the 0.5 decimal point for all entries including and following "Part Two."

For example, they attribute 32.5 BBY as a date instead of 32 BBY or 31 BBY.

Likewise, rather than stating the crisis occurred in 33.5 BBY, it states it occurred in 33 BBY, meaning it took place prior to the .5 BBY, or else they would have included it.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Then it's not conclusive.

It is, because there's absolutely no evidence Anakin Skywalker was born in a month or two. That's something that Shimi would have said.

That being stated, the gestation is only relevant when ignoring the fact that the event took place before 33.5 BBY.

So, you would have to ignore two things for it to be not conclusive.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
It is, because there's absolutely no evidence Anakin Skywalker was born in a month or two. That's something that Shimi would have said.

That being stated, the gestation is only relevant when ignoring the fact that the event took place before 33.5 BBY.

So, you would have to ignore two things for it to be not conclusive.

She might not have thought that relevant to mention when Jinn would already be skeptical enough at a "virgin birth."

No, you would simply have to recognize that those dates were left "approximate" for a reason. To deal with contradictions like these and that the 0.0-0.5 dating system is likely only relevant to dates listed within it's own pages.

I would like the quote that the 0.0-0.5 system is supposed to be applied to all events left unspecified. That seems ridiculous given we're given unspecified dates all the time within Legends novels.

How do we know what Shmi would have said? She didn't even bring up the fact that he was the product of immaculate conception until Qui-Gon specifically asked who the baby daddy was.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
No.

TNEC provides specific dates down to the 0.5 decimal point for all entries including and following "Part Two."

For example, they attribute 32.5 BBY as a date instead of 32 BBY or 31 BBY.

Likewise, rather than stating the crisis occurred in 33.5 BBY, it states it occurred in 33 BBY, meaning it took place prior to the .5 BBY, or else they would have included it.

I still don't have my copy of the TNEC in front of me, but are you seriously ascribing that much importance to the decimal points? Wouldn't that suggest that most of the major galactic events - most of which are designated with a blanket _.0 BBY and lack a specific decimal - occurred in the first half of that particular year? Every time?

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
She might not have thought that relevant to mention when Jinn would already be skeptical enough at a "virgin birth."

No, you would simply have to recognize that those dates were left "approximate" for a reason. To deal with contradictions like these and that the 0.0-0.5 dating system is likely only relevant to dates listed within it's own pages.

Jinn was blatantly not skeptical about it. Sources state that she confirmed his suspicions.

I don't think you know what you're arguing here.

The 0.0-0.5 dating system includes the date in question, which is the Yinchorri Uprising.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
How do we know what Shmi would have said? She didn't even bring up the fact that he was the product of immaculate conception until Qui-Gon specifically asked who the baby daddy was.

I still don't have my copy of the TNEC in front of me, but are you seriously ascribing that much importance to the decimal points? Wouldn't that suggest that most of the major galactic events - most of which are designated with a blanket _.0 BBY and lack a specific decimal - occurred in the first half of that particular year? Every time?

She would have specified when she was saying how she carried him and whatnot.

The New Essential Chronology attributes .5 decimal points to years that occur in the later part of the year.

But yes, all dates labeled without a decimal in TNEC is to be taken as being in the first half of the year.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
but are you seriously ascribing that much importance to the decimal points? Wouldn't that suggest that most of the major galactic events - most of which are designated with a blanket _.0 BBY and lack a specific decimal - occurred in the first half of that particular year? Every time?

He seriously is. Lol.

By the way, a lot of times that happens intentionally. For example, Darth Revan was betrayed by Darth Malak at midnight 3957 / 3958 BBY.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Jinn was blatantly not skeptical about it. Sources state that she confirmed his suspicions.

I don't think you know what you're arguing here.

The 0.0-0.5 dating system includes the date in question, which is the Yinchorri Uprising.

But how would she know what his reaction would be?

I think I do. I'm stating that the "approximate" was put beforehand to deal with blatant attempts to warp continuity like you're attempting now.

Please source it.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
She would have specified when she was saying how she carried him and whatnot.

...eh?

She literally left out the most critical detail of his conception until she was flat out asked if there was a father. Her response was essentially: "nope."

Clearly not a woman for volunteering the intimate details.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
The New Essential Chronology attributes .5 decimal points to years that occur in the later part of the year.

To years that occur in the later part of the year? Eh? What?

And I'm 99.9% sure I don't recall any source, even TNEC, assigning specific decimal points to events during KOTOR, TOTJ, or most events in galactic history. So my question is, in all those cases, did those events just happen to occur in the beginning of that given year, since no decimal point is given?