zeo

Cool, I never knew there was an original book to the story. So I stand corrected.Though I think it was more the mindset and budget limits of sci-fi's of the 50's that prevented them from being faithful to the book back in the '51 movie. After all just three years later they came out with the Body Snatcher in '54, a movie full of alien imitators and they did have shape shifting monster movies back then. Also believability wasn't so much an issue back then, since audience then weren't as critical as they are now. Well you could always assume that some catalyst could be involved, after all biology is just organic chemistry and chemical reactions can be accelerated quite a bit with the proper catalyst to speed up the reactions. The things we can't explain though is how zoanoids can increase their mass, simple conservation of energy tells us that's basically impossible without a massive influx of either raw energy or consumed matter. My own theory is that the Creators knew how the Guyver organism could Bio-Boost itself, since even the Sho Clone Monster was referred to as the Bio-Booster Organism and we know the Bio-Boost deals with siphoning energy from the Boost Dimension, and thus used that knowledge to create a catalyst to allow for zoaform transformation. Essentially the act of transforming siphons energy from the Boost Dimension, but unlike a Guyver they can only do so while transforming while the Guyver can continuously siphon energy. It would fully explain how zoaforms can transform so quickly, increase their mass, why many seem to glow as they transform, and still have enough energy to fight. But Takaya never really explained it so it's just my theory for now.

Wow that works perfectly with the perceived movement of Archanfel, with him first looking to his right and then looking forward. So if this is correct, and I believe it is, then Archanfel was floating facing toward Earth when the Asteroid appeared. He couldn't move so only looked right but the Asteroid quickly moved into his forward view, meaning he didn't turn and was still mostly paralyzed at that point, and he immediately realized what would happen. The revised distances gives him a better window of opportunity to intercept the Asteroid before it's course and his would both intersect the Earth, assuming he didn't take a curved intercept trajectory and just went straight for the Asteroid, making the whole thing more believable. Course that also means Archanfel was moving pretty damn fast himself once he got going to not only catch up to the Asteroid but use his shield to smash it to bits. Must have been like a bullet smashing through an apple. I really like it when it seems Takaya makes things that click well together, making the story more believable.

Well the original Thing was a plant based monster that fed off blood, Carpenter just updated it into an even scarier creature that became its victims. The later comic mini-series was cool too and continued off from the movie. Personally, I think Aptom can absorb any living thing but Zoanoids provide more energy. The transformation of the victims I think are either a reflex action as they try to resist or Aptom was triggering it so he could absorb as much energy from them as possible as he absorbs them.

Actual he was the poster child for anti-war sentiment, still is really. Remember Tony starts out as a weapons manufacturer and in both the original and movie origins that comes back to haunt him big time. Anyway, the original comic book origin mirrored the movie's depiction. Except it took place during the Vietnam War and similarly Tony got shrapnel in his chest. An Asian physician helped him and created a sort of iron lung like chest plate which kept the shrapnel from reaching his heart. Tony improved on it to make himself mobile and then together they augmented the chest plate with the rest of the armor and he escaped. Similarly the physician died during the escape and Tony dedicates his life to making things right. The Movie version was a little bit more realistic, except for the Arc device and Tony surviving Crashing hard enough to break the Armor and not be seriously hurt. Also instead of a chest plate Tony just has the Arc in a chest cavity, which is a lot easier to hide. Another change, the movie version emphasized flight. The original took longer to perfect that technology and didn't have the benefit of the Arc to fuel the Armor and so had to survive on battery power alone. As for how Tony survives, the armor is not just solid armor. It's layered and each layer has a different purpose that works together. So the armor provides padding as well as armor. Also the Armor spreads impact force over the whole armor, so it isn't localized as much. Though the movie did take heavy liberties with this, the comic did come up with explainations like the repulsor technology was also adapted as a inertia dampener to both deal with G force and impacts. The armor also regulates temperature and provides a level of life support. The comic also uses more advance ideas on armor design that approaches Nano-technology, including polarized armor, 3D mesh structure for both comfort and extremely strong structural integrity, and force fields. The movie version didn't explain any of that and yet still withstood attacks that would have obliterated a tank. Though the flight characteristics of the movie Armor was more realistic and using the hand pulsors for secondary thrusters for better control makes good sense. Speaking of which, who knows how Ironman originally got his enemies frozen?

Cool, I think we can at least get the general idea of how Takaya had actually envisioned the scene and at least work out an upper limit range to Archanfel's power. Originally I had gone under the assumption he was in front of the Asteroid, which would have greatly reduced the amount of energy it would have taken him to destroy it. Since he could have then used the Asteroid's own kinetic energy against it, but if he was behind it or hit it from the side then the energy he would need would have been significantly greater. In other words Archanfel is Takaya's Deathstar :wink:

You mean during the mid-air battle? I'm pretty sure that was heat too, the scene a bit earlier when Neo Zektole destroyed Aptom's Bio-Missiles was definitely with electricity but when Aptom tried to absorb him it looked more like Darzerb's heat blast aura. Unlike the missile scene there was no visible electrical arcs, I also don't think Takaya would have him use the same ability twice in a row since he was demonstrating that Neo Zektole had the powers of all 5 of the Team 5 Hyper Zoanoids. However, I can see how it could be thought of as an electrical attack, though that doesn't apply to Ryuki's theory since Aptom couldn't absorb NZ because of the anti-bodies that both prevent the process and inhibits Aptom's metabolism. Perhaps it was another scene?

When was this? I only recall when Darzerb repelled Aptom with a blast of heat? Interesting theory though, personaly I think it's just that Aptom doesn't want to kill civilians. After all he has tried to absorb G1 at least once, or more precisely Khan did while controlling Aptom's body as Chaos Aptom, and was only stopped because of the CM. It could be because he absorbs by acting like a virus and infecting his victim, literally taking over from the inside out. I think that's how he described it, he even calls the ability parasitic. Though that doesn't rule out your theory, as perhaps the cells have to be in a certain state in order to be assimulated? Alternatively it could be just a compulsary reaction, basically the last attempt of the victim to resist the absorbsion process since the zoaform is their stronger form.

Repulsors are a derivative of particle beam weapon technology. Originally it was a composite emitter of tri-laser and particle beam emitter. The tri-laster would rapidly rotate and create an ionized path through the air through which the particle stream is then fired. Giving a one-two punch. The repulsor effect was described as a subatomic effect that created a repulsing effect. Some of his more advance Armors in the comic could even use the repulsor technology to basically fly and self position each part of the armor. So kinda like the Guyver it would literally wrap itself around him. The movie introduces a new device called simply the "Arc". This is a totally sci-fi power generator, basically working much like a zero point energy generator like the ZPM's on Stargate. The closest we're likely to get to something like that is some sort of micro-fusion reactor. The first miniature Arc he created could generate 3 GJ/s, while the 2nd improved reactor could generate around 4 times that. Incidently, 3 GJ/s equates to 3GW of power, or approximately four million horsepower. Which is like 15 times greater than the power of a Nimitz class aircraft carrier nuclear reactor, which in turn means the 2nd device granted him around 60 times the power generated by that type of Nuclear Reactor. The movie repulsors are a little different, encorportating a magnetic field pulsor effect. Probably using particle stream to produce a ionic plasma propulsion (this is why he could use both his hands and boots to fly). This is probably also part of the Arc technology, which is why the armor works so well with the Arc, besides getting its power from it. In the Comic Ironman got his power from batteries, usually stored on hip pods in most models and later destributed throughout the armor and assited with the ability to absorb energy from a variety of external sources. Anyway, next trivia question... What was Ironman's origin in the original comic?

True, we would have to assume its his point of view. Though that's pretty much what I'm thinking that he was following them and they stopped him near the lunar orbit range from Earth just before they jumped. The Asteroid in turn appeared near the same range and as it was released from hyper space and left to hurtle towards the Earth it came into Archanfel's field of view. I'm also assuming that when he turned to his right that he was not only looking at the asteroid but back the way he came and thus saw the Earth. I think it's a possible scenario anyway, at least when factoring in how fast the asteroid appeared to be moving. Thinking that it appeared to his right and then quickly moved towards the front of his view basically. If it was near his position then it would rapidly shift his point of view to include the Earth as it headed that way. We do have the image of him looking to his right and then the next panel has him facing forward, so he either turned his body or the Asteroid rapidly moved to the front of his view. Course I'm assuming it was moving so fast that it was basically minutes before it would have hit. What do you think? Plausible? As for the Asteroid analysis, I was thinking we could work from your previous work on the first image and adjust for the lunar orbit range. And then use your previous estimate of the Asteroid's size to determine the distance to the asteroid from the point of view shown in the second image, which would then allow us to triangulate Archanfel's position, assuming of course that is his point of view we are being shown. If that actually works, and that's a pretty give "If" I know, we could then plot the likely course Archanfel took to intercept the Asteroid, which would then give us the ability to calculate how much energy was required to both destroy the Asteroid and prevent more than a few fragments of its mass from hitting the Earth. Phew, I just wish I had that program you're using. It's a lot harder to do this with just a calculator and trig. I'm not even done with the first image, thanks in part to a very busy work week.

Cool, very interesting, though if this all lines up even a little it means Archanfel was behind the Asteroid when he attacked it. So that means even if he hit it at an angle that he would have to had put a lot more energy into his attack than I previously thought to still prevent most of the mass the Asteroid from hitting the planet. It's even more shocking to realize that Asteroid is practically a planet itself, when we originally thought it was smaller than a moon, the Creators definitely don't hold back when they want to annihilate a threat. The 400,000km. range does sound consistant with a near lunar orbit, kinda makes sense if the Creators had to get past both the Earth and the Moon's gravity before jumping to hyper space and he was trying to follow them when they stopped him. Potentially the 12 degree could still work if the Asteroid hit the Earth off center. Creator's aim still pretty good though. :wink:

Hey, who wants to discuss the new IRONMAN movie? We could also have IRONMAN trivia, like who knows what a Repulsor is?

Hmm, this is a long shot but I think it potentially could yield an interesting result. Remember the other image of when the Asteroid first appeared and we are shown it heading towards the Earth? (Book15-33.jpg, pg 67-68) There is a possible indication of distance in the Manga that would make it possible to use that image to correlate the two images for accuracy. When Archanfel was floating paralyzed he senses the spatial distortion that was forming just before the Asteroid appeared and according to the Advocacy translation said, "... there it is, something enormous is about to appear... Something similar to a lunar orbit" (Book15-32.jpg-pg. 66 bottom right panel) This could mean that the Asteroid appeared to Archanfel from a lunar orbit, with him somewhere to the side since he looked to his right, though the wording isn't exactly clear and could also just have been a reference to how big the spatial distortion was. If true though the Moon's orbit is elliptical: its average orbital radius is 384401 km, apogee (farthest distance from the Earth) is 406700 km, and perigee (distance of closest approach to the Earth) is 356400 km. The shot pictures the Earth as the Asteroid heads towards it, and apparently at the same or near the same angle as the impact image, so if we calculate for lunar orbit for distance we could see whether the impact image is accurate or not, or at least close. If they match up then it means the image is accurate, which would be really cool. Course it's a real long shot since it all depends on how accurately Takaya drew those images, though if he had a specific size for the asteroid and not just thinking big he could easily have scaled it using a compass and angular degrees. It would be interesting if they match up though.

No problem, I'm glad we cleared that up... Since you like debating these things, perhaps we can do the analysis of the Asteroid's destruction after I do the math on this one? At least to give us a better ball park figures to work with?

I see, you thought just because you were trying to interject the fact that the image was a mental projection of what the impact would be like that it excluded the idea it could have been an accurate comparison of the two bodies and only the impact was imagined.Fair enough but your last statement was still a distortion of what I asked you on how do you think they figure these things out for real? It seems you just don't want to try to figure this one out and are just pointing out the obvious reasons not to, but isn't the reason we bother is for the fun of it? On whether it was Archanfel or Imakarum I think its debateable. For all intents and purposes we were seeing Archanfel's memories and thoughts like a movie. So I believe Imakarum was just observing, you could be right though but in either case the size of the asteroid would be determined by the accuracy of Archanfel's memory. I'm just assuming its correct, backed by the probabilities that it was, to use the image for an actual calculation of scale and size as otherwise we will never know how big the asteroid was or should I say could have been. Only if we are debating absolutes and don't consider the image accurate enough to prove anything, but if we assume the image is accurate then we can calculate the size using the Earth as a yard stick. I'll run the numbers in any case, if nothing else it will add another example for us to consider in other debates. Such as just how much energy did Archanfel use to destroy the asteroid, reason enough I think to bother.

Well before we get into another argument I will publically apologize if I offended Ryuki, my statement was not to mean he didn't know what he was doing in any way but rather I just disagreed with its use in this problem. The first part, not the last four examples. It was just a misunderstanding starting from the fact I had not provided all the information that I was working with from the source of the image that was being used in this topic. The image itself provided the wrong dimension of the calculated width of the asteroid according to the pixel count. Thus the origin of the misunderstanding. The final conclusion I completely agree with however. No that isn't what I said at all and in all fairness that is a complete distortion of what I said and what scientists actually do to determine sizes of celestial objects. Scientists figured out the sizes of other planets with observations and math, specifically trigonometry. You really just need a reference point, preferably two, basically a starting point to figure out the rest. Normally they would use Trigonometric Parallax if you can have at least 2 reference points but you can still figure it out if you only have one and a known size of an object inside the reference point. For example if we were using human vision to help determine the distance of an object of known size then we could use Pythagorean theorem and the trig formula of tanA=A/B. Configure it D=W/tan(60), with 60 being the average for human horizontal peripheral vision (45 degrees for vertical). So once we have an object within that field of vision we can use the formular to determine how far away that object is. Similarly if we knew the distance but not the width then we can rearrange the formular to then determine the width. This is because human vision is constant, it doesn't change zoom. The human eye only changes focal point so we can use what we see for a direct comparison/yard stick and use math to then determine the exact details. The resolution of the eye is about 1 arc-minute, which means we can see something which makes an angle of not 1 degree, but 1/60 of a degree. Actually it means we can detect two items separated by that angle, but let's not be too finnicky:) So we can also calculate the size of something within our field of view as well. Alternatively we can use Rule 57 ( Angular size/360 degrees=Actual Size/(2xPIxD) ), an object of angular degree of 1 is about 57 times further away than its size. All is required to solve it that way is to know the size of the object, in this case the Earth, and then figure how many angular degrees the object takes up of your view to then calculate the distance, giving you the two figures you would need to calculate the size of any other object in the same field of view. He doesn't need to, all we need to know is how much it fills his field of vision and the image can be inferred to give us that.Again, human vision doesn't zoom or magnify, it only changes focal point. Like the image below, the human eye can focus on either the front image of Grommet or the back image of the car but not both at the same time and that is how we sense distance, along with the use of both eyes to triangulate for depth. Though our stereoscopic vision is only effective up to a distance of about 200 meters, due to the fact our stereoscopic vision is limited by how far our eyes are separated, so an observer seeing a scene like the image of the Earth from space would be the same as seeing a 2D image at that distance. Whether we focus on Grommet or the Car the size they appear to us will remain the same, the focal point is what tells us which is closer and which is further. We are assuming the image was imagined correctly, not much point to analyzing it otherwise, but Archanfel was able to sense the distortion of space it came through even before it appeared and so it is possible it is within his ability to properly gauge the size of the asteroid. Besides he had a good view of it, in space there isn't any atmospheric distortion and light travels in straight lines so there is no incidental light coming from the same source. Basically this means the light comes straight to you and if you aren't in the direction the light is traveling then you won't see the light at all. So you won't be seeing the light from the object from different angles. Visual acuity in space is thus greater than it is on Earth due to the lack of distortion. Of course all this is assuming that we can look at the image as if it was an actual snap shot of what Archanfel was seeing. But assuming it is does mean we can calculate the actual size of the asteroid. I'll do the math later and see if I can give you an exact figure.

Not silly, just a direct interpretation. If the eco-system (ecological-system) is how everything interacts then manipulating the ecosystem means you are controlling the interactions, not going in changing the elements involved. I'm just going by what the word actually means. If you're working with the system to manipulate it then you're not doing something outside the system like genetic engineering would be. I hope that clears up where I'm coming from... I think we should take it to PM if you want to continue Jukai. Other than that, yes this debate has been fun and you have got me thinking of all the possible scenarios. Sorry if I came across as inflexible, I just try to keep what I think the Manga shows and what I think is possible separate in debates that effect the official information. Fact is I help write a Guyver Fan Fiction that is pretty wild compared to the original Takaya story. So if this had been a theoretical debate it would have been no holds barred.

I agree, my intent is not to provocate but to get everyone thinking and use logical reasoning instead of just assuming things, which I hope I have done. So if you want you can have your last says Jukai and I won't reply to finish this debate and then someone can lock the topic.

No that isn't my method of debate. Actually my method of debate is to provide an answer, usually summarized since the details I go into far exceed what I write in my posts (believe it or not I'm trying to keep it short), and only correct misinterpretations when it crops up. For one I never changed my stance on this one and I haven't forgotten what was said. For example it might have helped to also look up the definition of the word Environment as well as Ecosystem to give a direct comparison of the two terms.. Environment does includes this in its definition... The whole point of my clarification is the fact that only manipulation of the ecosystem is mentioned in the Manga. Manipulation of the ecosystem means you manipulate the system of how everything interacts, because that is what is meant by the ecosystem. It's called Eco (as in ecology) - System after all! You don't manipulate a system by working outside its rules now do you? Really, just go to a site like, http://www.the-farm-business-gym.com/ecosy...-processes.html Which shows the usual methods we use to control an ecosystem. While genetic manipulation is an entirely different method of control that would have serious ramifications to an ecosystem if not done properly and on a planetary scale there is no real way to be sure nothing would go wrong. The quote you posted doesn't contradict that and I just clarified that it didn't change what I said and that I wasn't limiting it by using the term Environment or saying it excludes direct manipulations versus indirect manipulation that manipulating the ecosystem would involve. However your post suggested you believed it was limitating and other possibilities should be open and thus I corrected that misinterpretation of what I had stated, nothing more.

And what part of that doesn't mean Environment? I wasn't limiting the definition to just temperature or things like that Ryuki. If all things are working together then wouldn't messing with one thing effect it ALL? Remember I also mentioned things like food chain, which is also part of the ecosystem equation! Manipulating the ecosystem doesn't mean selective changes to just one species, it means you change the living system of the whole environment. Remember the definition you just gave specifically said with all things in a given environment working/functioning together, which means if you manipulate the ecosystem you are manipulating how all those things work off each other. Like stimulating the plant life to produce more oxygen, just make it rain more, means bugs and animals can grow bigger. Or reducing the available water in a area limit the number of available species and cause the local life to adapt. Or killing off a species can make other species the ability to evolve without predators or the opposite. None of which requires or suggest direct genetic manipulation. For example the origin for the reason why humans walk upright is thought to be because at the time there was considerable droughts and reduction in forest that forced our ancestors to walk and walking upright is more efficient and easier to maintain. Thus we can see how adjusting the ecosystem can change the course of evolution. And I did point out the dangers to radically altering any species in an ecosystem with genetic manipulation.

That is a completely erroneous statement Jukai. Really now how do you think we determine the size of other planets? Fact is we got the Earth for scale and that really is all we need to then determine the size of the Asteroid. It's the same reason forensics take pictures with either rulers in the shot or an object of known size and scale for comparison, like dropping a dollar bill into the shot, etc. Note also the Asteroid was visible from Earth as we are shown the humans looking up at it as it approached, so it had to be pretty massive. Sorry Ryuki unless you can point to anyone looking through a lens in the Manga then were aren't looking through a lens and the only thing left that could produce a lens distortion would be atmosphere. It's the same reason why we put the Hubble Telescope in Space, to avoid distortion and just get a straight image. Archanfel isn't in a space ship looking through a camera or other lens. He's floating in space looking at the Earth with nothing but vacuum between him and his view. So where would you be gettig your lens distortion from? Remember you're talking about keystone distortion that we would get from say a camera lens that has been tilted, but we wouldn't get that distortion if the lens is straight on. You yourself made note that the size distortion would be incredible. Yet you went with a lens distortion instead of just increasing the size of your simulation. Really, the only distortion in space is either from distance or from gravity but that takes either very strong gravity or a very long distance to be noticeable. You were using lens distortion which would be the same as trying to simulate atmosphereic distortion since the physics behind them are the same, atmosphere is also like a lens remember. Just like we would get a lens distortion from water when viewed at angles. Light gets refracted at different angles when passing through different mediums but we aren't looking through a lens of any sort. We are looking through space at an asteroid smashing into the Earth. The impact itself is pushing the atmosphere of the Earth away from the Asteroid so it is not getting a lens effect from that, leaving us a straight size comparison with only depth of field being the only remaining distortion to account for. The Asteroid itself has no atmosphere so it isn't getting distorted and space has no distorting effect since it has not atmosphere so the use of lens effect is not appropriate for this problem. So I wasn't disputing a lens effect could cause that effect, I was disputing the use of a lens effect in this situation, the vacuum of space is not known for such distortion after all. Also the two objects are already being shown starting to smash into each other, which would minimize any distortion as the two start to move into each other. Giving us a depth distortion of only 4-6 kilometers or the radius of the Earth. Enough for a distortion in size perception but not enough for a great difference in size. Well for one thing I did say it was from that topic in which it was being debated. I never said I created it, I would have said so if that was the case.But you are right I should have posted more information on it from the start since you didn't have the benefit of reading the whole debate, though one of the reasons the image was low resolution was because it wasn't being used so you could read the figures off it. Jukai for example couldn't even see that it was a comma and not a period and so originally thought it was 1.8 km. This was probably because the debate started with the assumption that the Asteroid was about moon size but final analysis showed it was much bigger. The only thing revalent about the image and why I posted it was the color shaded circles showing the size comparison. Besides you guys ignored what I actually said and just went with what you could see from the image, which means you excluded other information that would have corrected your assumption.

I didn't create the image, it was created by someone who analyzed the image from the Manga and determined it was the size of Mars. His exact words were... As you can see from the quote he just mis-labeled the image he created. I just brought it in to show what I think was the source of that other person who piped in the original topic that it was Mars size and was only using it because it emphasized the comparison of the side by side spherical sizes of both planets with the overlayed circles which he also explained was drawn from making circles to the percentage size of both planets and showing they match to the the scale shown in the Manga image. Thing is all you have to do is take the diameter of the Earth to use as a yard stick and compare it to the diameter of the asteroid to get what he got. Now doing what he did and just comparing the flat image does give you the size nearly that of Mars, the only thing he didn't take into account was the change in perception due to depth. Now the exact math for depth perception adjustment may not be easy but most of the hard work was taken care of by giving us a starting point of a Mars to Earth size comparison. An Earth to Moon size comparison... Shows it can't be a Pluto size object since Pluto's diameter is 2274 kilometers while the moon has a diameter of 3475 km. So quite frankly the moon is bigger than Pluto. A direct comparison to Earth shows Pluto is only .18 the size of the Earth, so we can immediately drop it because it is not even in the ballpark. Which brings us back to the Mars estimate as our starting point, the reason I say this is simply because even with depth perception distortion accounted for the size of the Asteroid can't be greatly different from the original estimate since the Asteroid isn't that far from the Earth. We are shown it impacting after all, the depth perception only comes into play because the Asteroid is being shown closer to our point of view than the Earth and because we are talking about objects that are pretty massive. So you can give a conservative estimate ball park figure right off the bat of 4-6 thousand kilometers, just enough to cause shift in size to a sub-Mars estimate. Now the problem with Ryuki's carefully done analysis is the fact in space there is no atmosphere and thus no visual distortion. And he used the wrong figure for the diameter of the Asteroid. I would have posted the link to the topic but it was from another site and I usually refrain from linking to other sites. But in any case this shows we can do fairly direct comparison and see that the asteroid was just a bit smaller than Mars size, which puts it in the range of Mercury. Since Mercury has a diameter of 4,878 km and pretty close to the Mars size estimate.

I didn't address it because it doesn't change anything. Besides it was based on a flawed premise that would only be valid if we were talking about different scenes. Then there wouldn't be a direct comparison and we could argue whether it was artistic interpretation or not. Only then would there be no authority aside from Takaya. However the scenes in question depict the exact same period in time of the Creators arriving and landing on the Earth, showing essentially the same scene and just drawn differently. Just like G2 was later drawn differently when we know he was originally drawn almost exactly like G1, giving us a direct comparison to plainly tell us it was artistic interpretation. And you still haven't shown me where your quote is, you're just claiming it exists Sigh... I already said it was right where they were talling Archanfel the history behind his and human creation. Did you not bother to read that part? If you must be lead there go to book14-82.jpg and start reading! It's right in the panel showing human evolution. And I have addressed your points. As for SE, he just presented a logical alternative explaination that works with what we are shown, the stasis containment of the Guyver Unit can preserve the organism for millions of years. This means the Creators had the technology to put things into stasis. We also know from the Manga that they put many of their test animals in stasis, these were shown floating in the Creator Bio-Tubes around Archanfel as he slept during the ice age the asteroid fragments caused. This in part is where all the creatures on Silha island came from when Archanfel released them from the Relic, which is also another indication he had awakened between the time the Creators left and when he met Barcas. So SE's theory does provide an alternate theory for how the Creators could have spent so much time on Earth, though it does have the problem of how they could have kept accurate tabs on the progress of the experiment it is an alternative to simple long life. As for guessing... Incorrect, guessing is coming to a conclusion without any logical analysis. My conclusions were neither random nor without something to back them up. Ergo they were logical analysis giving us a logical conclusion. While guessing is suggesting things without anything but your opinion to back them up. Now as to your claim that I haven't provided proof... What I have given you is proof because I have given you a series of examples through at least 4 of the books as well as other sources like the OAV. If you judged the evidence without bias then it becomes apparent what it all leads to and what the actual intent of Takaya was. Most of the the other stuff was just showing examples for comparison. You want to interpret the evidence in other ways, fine but don't just ignore the obvious interpretation and just go straight to your fanciful ones. So let's go through them... *Nowhere does it say the Creators accelerated evolution, you have to account for this. It may be possible but doesn't mean they did it. *It does say the Creators used manipulation of the ecosystem but the ecosystem is the environment, which means they made no direct manipulations until they started zoaforming humans. Otherwise the statement would be false and brings up the question of why they would say that if that isn't what they did. *Your theory that they had goes against the statement that they achieved their goals through manipulation of the ecosystem. Never mind genetic manipulation only works if you know what you are going to make otherwise you simply cause random mutations that could easily destroy your experiment and you would have to start from scratch. Some of the reasons People fear Genetic engineered food for example is precisely because of the dangers of creating a harmful mutation or causing a cross species contanimation of genetic information. Like for example if you had a compromised digestive tract GM food could get into your body and transfer its genetics to you, causing harmful mutations and disease. Especially if the retrovirus used to manipulate the genetic information was still present. Now imagine how hard it would be to balance and maintain order on a genetic experiment that encompasses an entire planet? Basically what you proposed is for practicality sake insane as no amount of precautions would ever be enough. Course you could point to something like Waferdanos but I could point out there was a reason why he was isolated to a single island. But the dinosaurs were never that isolated so there would have been limits to what the Creators could have done. Besides if what you suggest was true then they could also have killed the dinosaurs off without dropping a meteor on them, thus proving your assumption to be wrong. Especially considering the level of damage and collateral damage dropping a Meteor on the planet involves would make it very hard to explain why they did it if an easier alternative was available. *The zoaforming process wasn't created over night, Silha island is full of prototypes that show the Creators had to develop the zoaforming technology even after they chose humans to be their warrior race. *Zoaforms are genetically engineered with DNA drawn from all life, creating a new battle form based on various combinations of genetic traits. However in order to have that database of genetic information the Creators would have to have done eons worth of research on every possible genetic combinations. On the next point of contention... The image I posted was from the debate from the person who was claiming the asteroid was Mars size, remember we were arguing why someone claimed it was Mars size to begin with and why I was saying it was slightly smaller, point of fact if you do compare the diameters of both it does give that impression, my correction was for depth of field. . Fact is the Earth has a diameter of 12756.1 km, meaning pluto wouldn't even come close to a quarter of the diameter of the Earth. Let alone near half as the shown impacting Asteroid clearly is. Mars though is 6780 km, or just barely over half the diameter of the Earth. Now taking two circles with the diameters of the Earth and Mars and then overlay them will give you the same image as shown in the posted image. The problem is neither are flat 2D objects so I corrected the analysis for depth of field, approximately 4-6 thousand km, and estimated that the size of the Asteroid was actually closer to Mercury, which has a diameter of 4,878 km (Over twice Pluto's). So your confusion aside, my correction is a valid one. Just to clarify, the guy who made the argument for Mars size stated this along with the image... So he just labeled it wrong, but doesn't change the original claim made from that image that it was Mars size. And that was what I was responding to. Then on you next point. . . Zoanoids didn't exist until after the project was done, once they had their war race they customized them. And Silha island is full of the experiments it took to develop the zoaform technology. Showing the technology took time to develop and wasn't available before the arrival of humans on the scene. Well, since you asked, I could since I know the principle by which Takaya based the character and know enough about science to see how it works.It does help that Takaya used actual biological references to describe what Aptom all the way through to Khan actually do. We just don't have the technology to do it ourselves, fictional status aside, but we can understand the principles by which they work. Just like we can understand how certain medicines work even though we don't have the technology to produce it ourselves and have to draw it from natural biological sources because the molecules responsible is too complex for us to recreate with our present technology. Though I need to correct you again and point out Khan can only absorb zoanoids, not humans persay. He accomplishes this by a combination of his natural ability to control zoanoids and a very Aptom like ability to take over the biology of other zoanoids and assimulate them into his body. So like Aptom he basically eats them and makes them part of himself but unlike Aptom, who does it in a parasitic way (he was based on John Carpenter's "The Thing"), he doesn't infect them to do it. Aptom is the more realistic of the two, since he infects his host and like a virus takes over. Real world viruses do the same thing and retro-viruses can rewrite DNA, Aptom is just more complex but works under the same basic principle as a virus. In principle it isn't too different from how we eat, we digest and make the raw material part of our body. They just do it in a more complex and far more rapid ways, though in either case the end result is the same. The zoanoid dies and becomes part of their body and the process is irreversable. Kinda like a nightmare version of nanite technology, each nanite, or in their case cell, can break down and assimulates a given target mass. Like the Borg, etc. Now the problem with simply making dinosaurs bigger not only involves potentially contaminating the gene pool but they would also still need to do research. Especially when deciding how big they wanted them. After all size has to be balanced with speed and they would have to experiment with different designs to find the designs that could succeed at larger sizes, or the dinosaurs could have collapsed from their own weight, etc. Case in point, using a real world example, before we discovered that T-Rex was more like a bird than a reptile our original models of T-Rex showed its bones would be so dense that if it ever fell while running it would literally kill itself and couldn't run very fast at all. But analysis of the bone structure showed it was more like bird bones and thus light, cutting off tons to the T-Rex estimated weight and showing us the T-Rex could run at least 30 MPH and was fairly agile. But making them less dense is fairly counter intuitive to what we would have expected but shows how nature can come up with solutions we wouldn't have thought of. But also shows that doing it on purpose would have taken many tries. Now multiply that by how many different type of dinosaurs there were and even with direct genetic manipulation it would have taken them a very long time to go through all the variables. The environment would also have to be adjusted and they would have to make sure what they did didn't effect all life. Remember all these creatures were part of a food chain. It also doesn't change the fact they would still have to test each and every one of the dinosaurs. They weren't all T-Rex's after all, in fact T-Rex was one of the last dinosaurs to evolve since it is from the Jurassic period. All of which means it would take time before they eventually come to the conclusion that dinosaurs weren't the way to go and they couldn't really cut corners. And again if they had genetically engineered the dinosaurs then they could also have just killed them off the same way but the fact they resorted to smashing the planet with a giant meteor and causing massive devastation that effected the entire ecosystem means quite clearly that they did not. Otherwise the use of the Meteor would make no sense. The fossil that Archanfel saw shows that they let millions of years pass before humans evolved. Further indicating they limited themselves to controlling the environment to manipulate life and evolution. I also disagree with your supposition that there is no science in the Guyver Story... 1) Just to be clear I'm basing my opinion on both the Manga and Real World Science, using the science to logically analyze what is shown in the Manga and to test how realistic Takaya's ideas are. 2) It's a sci-fi series, meaning it involves both science and fantasy, so you are wrong that it isn't based on science at all. There is science behind many of the concepts in the Guyver Manga. Examples: Lasers, are real. That human's evolved from more primitive mammals is true. Black Holes and such are based on actual scientific theories. Storing and/or accessing higher dimensions is a principle drawn from scientific theories. Genetic engineering is a real science, Takaya even has Chronos use retro-viruses and embryonic fluids in the zoaforming process. Legends of werewolves and such are mythical but they are also part of our history. Etc. Takaya just mixes it all into his fictional story. So just because the story is fictional doesn't mean we can't logically analyze it and test it for both Takaya's intent and the accuracy of his story. Correction, Japan was an empire, complete with an Emperor, before WWII, now they are a demoncracy. So no they were not the way they are now before the US was a nation.Never mind a little known fact about Japan during WWII was they not only took technology from their ally Germany but they also improved on that technology, if we hadn't bombed them they might have developed the technology to be an even greater threat than Germany had been. It is also incorrect to say all the technology was given to them. Japan innovates and creates new technology, its one of the reasons we buy from them instead of US companies. Ditto with South Korea, the US isn't leading in robotic development nor in cellphone technology. Another sci-fi story example we can draw conclusions from is the STTNG: The Masterpiece Society episode, showing a genetically perfect race with supposedly the best minds and the best well oiled society structure. Yet they weren't as advance as those they left behind on Earth and the solution to their problem came from the technology developed for Geardi visors, a person who never would have existed in their society. This applies to the Creators because their technology would prevent disease and other problems. Their society would also not be prone to radical thinkers, even with each having their own personality some levels of creativity comes from those who aren't perfect. Meaning a race of geniuses may not actually develop as quickly as an imperfect race full of diversity and random variables. Adding yet another factor to believe the Creators aren't advancing at a rapid rate. Most of them are graduates of the Indian Institute of Technology, better known as IIT... Why? You thought it was outside their country or something?Another factor is motivation and opportunity. Like taking WWI Germany and comparing it to WWII Germany, aside from motivation it's the same People but with so much motivation that they developed advance technology and even put themselves in a position to try to take over the world in just a few years, despite the fact they were practically bankrupt after WWI, since they were forced to pay war reparations. While other similar nations that had no revolutionary motivation progressed at a far slower pace. This is like a 3rd World nation turning itself into a 1st world nation over night. And those who follow history know the German scientists were taken by both the US and Russia and are the basis for some of our rapid development. The inventor of the space shuttle for example was one of these former German scientists. (I believe I mentioned that before) The Creators however don't have such motivations, at least none that we know of and seemed overly logical from the few conversations we have seen them give. Nothing of the sort, I'm just a firm believer in logical reasoning and will point out when someone is coming to a conclusion counter to the actual evidence. There's possible and then there is practical, speeding things up when they had to do the research anyway doesn't make sense. Especially since speeding it up involves using processes that would disrupt the natural flow of evolution and cause ramification through the entire ecosystem. For example you introduce a new species to an area that isn't adapted for that species and you can completely upset the local balance, especially if the new area has no natural predators, etc. Like the Japanese Beatle that is killing trees here in the states or the African Killer Bees that is progressively killing off and replacing Bee colonies in the South America and the US. In short tampering can have unforseen consequences and until the Creators were sure of what they wanted to develop they couldn't risk such tampering as it could effect everything. Just because they could do it doesn't mean they would or that it would even be a good idea to do it when it could cause so many problems that they could easily wind up having to start from scratch. I don't know about you but waiting a few million years to get a result that they wanted makes more sense than risking a result they don't want and have to wait another Billion years to get back to where they was before they tampered. Carbon dating is a proven science, and we have more than one sample that we tested. Meaning there is accumulative proof backing the measurement.I also stated we have other ways of determining age, the revelant point is this is commonly accepted to be fact and Takaya would use it just like he would use a map of a city to properly lay out where his characters were, etc. After all Takaya didn't invent concepts like Black Holes, space travel, aliens, lasers, explosive chemicals, genetic engineering, etc. He just uses them in his story. Perhaps information overload? Other than that, yes you now understand the point of those examples.

The price of an over active mind I'm afraid, but unfortunately all that was the abbreviated version. Now it seems I must go into more of the finer details... case in point... Again, I included that it is easier for third world nations, which includes cost of labor. Never mind the 3rd world thing was really my point, and I didn't leave anything out. I may not have worded it in simple enough terms but even cost of labor was included in my analysis. Never mind it all only helps my argument since without a 3rd world nation the 1st world nation wouldn't have access to cheap labor and the higher cost of production would slow them down. Really, this should be obvious. We all know the differences between 3rd and 1st world nations, do I have to explain every aspect of them just to get my point across? Like it should be obvious that the 3rd world nation benefit by having access to more advance technology and the Resources of the 1st world nation, which in turn speeds up their advancement (we are comparing speeds of advancements) while the 1st world nation may benefit by cheaper labor but their advancement slows down as jobs becomes fewer and research and development are done elsewhere. Eventually some nations like Japan and South Korea can not only match the first world nation but start to rival them. While Chronos may be like the third world nation equivalent in terms of technology, they however had access to Creator technology while the Creators had no access to them. Giving them a lopsided advantage and the Creators no such advantage. The Creators would thus progress like a 1st world nation with no 3rd world nations to support its economy and development... Clear enough or do I have to go into the details of economic theories vs technological advancement patterns over time? The whole they may live extremely long and/or uses stasis to time skip, along with how hard it would be to further advance their already advance technology, factors would just makes there rate of progress even slower, giving us an accumulative effect more than a little lopsided in Chronos's favor. And the whole point that I list things is to show there are many factors but that the pattern of them all add up to supporting my argument and not his.

Sorry YoungGuyver, I didn't notice your post before... I'm not ignoring that point, in fact it supports my argument... A fact I thought was obvious but apparently not.To make it clear the 3rd World Nations comparison to 1st world Nations are like comparing Chronos to the Creators. The point being to show how it is a lot easier to copy tech than to invent it and the more advance you get the harder it is to top it. The less developed nations also like Chronos have more untapped resources, which is one of the reasons they advance so quickly. It cost them less and nothing is in their way so they can advance rapidly in the same time frame that a larger and more complex entity like the Creators would develop slowly. I also pointed out examples like South Korea that most definitely has seen major advancements and are also pushing the envelop in producing new technology. Their robotics development for example is rivaling Japan's. G2 also looked like G1 at one time, those early images of the Relics are also less detailed.But the fact the later images references the exact same time, of the Creators arrival on Earth, then we can safely say Takaya just improved his drawing style. Just like he changed G2's appearance. I addressed this, the Creators specifically stated they developed their creations by manipulating the eco-system. Ergo the environment! Since evolution is partly adapting to one's environment as well as developing into more complex life forms means all they had to do to make dinosaurs bigger was adjust the environment to promote larger growth. For example the Paleozoic era was so high in oxygen that bugs, who have to breath through their skin and don't have lungs, grew to fairly large sizes that would be unheard of today. The concentration of oxygen was so high that a typical forest ran the danger of literally exploding into fire during a lightning storm. But that would make the atmosphere incompatable for the time period man shows up since the oxygen levels were much like they are now and far lower, making it very hard to support such massive bodies. Waferdanos was one of the later experiments that they abandoned and was for terraforming other planets, which either means war wasn't the only purpose in the project or that making the battle field compatable for their living weapons was one of their side projects. Which is part of my point, they weren't in any rush when developing their bio-weapons. We only assume they were at war but they could just have been the equivalent of a gun company making a new gun. They knew they would eventually need it but they had plenty of time to develop it. Most of our own weapon's development is during peace time for example, we develop weapons for when we will eventually need them. Not just because we need them. And I believe I addressed this point in my arguments, but like the point with the 3rd world nations it may not be as clear as I thought it was. They wanted loyal soldiers, able to adapt to any battle conditions. -That much we can clearly gather from what they told Archanfel about the motivation behind the experiment.The flexible part could indicate they didn't want them for a particular war but just wars in general. Such an army could be used as an effective peace keeper force or just wipe out a less advance world so the Creators could move in and take its resources. The zoaforming process also meant they could be adapted to any type of warfare and not just the physical type. Aptom for example is an indication they could have developed other types that could have acted like a sentient disease for example. The potential was there in any case. But the telling thing to me was the fact they weren't going to take humanity to war but just to another planet so they can run more experiments. Even with their weapons they were still going to do more experiments, which is more the behavior of weapon smiths perfecting a weapon to be sold to the market rather than scientists developing weapons for an eminent war. That is a possibility, they could have been for example preparing to expand the empire and needed something to do the dirty work that such expansion would eventually entail. I think that is a safe assumption and research was a big part of their experiment and one of the points I mentioned was that would take a lot of time, especially with so many types of life forms to work with.

The use of stasis fields is a reasonable possibility, though if that was the case then it would further give reason why there advancement would be slow. Since they can't do anything while in stasis. It says it right where the Creators are explaining the history behind how he and the human race were developed. Sorry, it's an actual quote!!! And I'm not the one coming up with a theory that doesn't look at the evidence in the Manga. You just want to ignore the things that disagree with you or at least that's the impression you are giving me. I'm the one pointing to actual examples in the Manga, books 4, 7, 14, and 15 for example, not you. So how can you complain I'm not providing proof when I am? Where did I say that?Nope, never said that which means you either skipping over what I did say or simply refusing to properly process what I say because you might actually have to change your opinion then. I said once they created the Guyver Unit is probably when they started to have long life spans, or as SE said they could have started putting themselves in stasis, either way the Earth experiment took them a long time to complete. You erroneously took the idea that they are now long lived and slow advancing to mean they were always that way. Never mind all my examples show that my argument is for more advance societies to become slower, but when they started they would have been a lot faster. Especially my comparison to humans, showing your assumption would be the same as using how humans are now to say they were always like that when the fact is we evolved and were once very different from what we are now. Similarly the Creators would have been very different in their origin but since the time they came to Earth we are shown little to no change other than the experiment itself. Something you are ignoring in order to cling to your theory that they could have rapidly advanced in the last 10 thousand years when the pattern shown does not follow that. This doesn't mean the pattern stayed the same but we aren't given any other references to their culture and so we only have the Earth experiment to base the conclusion on but given that the logical conclusion is there advancement would be slow, at least compared to us. I could be wrong, there are unknown factors, but I'm only following the logical conclusion from what is shown and pointing out what is known doesn't support your theory. They changed the classification recently, and as I stated I was part of the debate on determining the size of the Asteroid, the claim was for a Mars size in the debate and that was what was quoted. I didn't make the image of the size comparison, so it may be labeled wrong but I did do a comparison with the moon and verified the math and yes it would be Mars size if you only consider the circumference and not the depth perception.The Asteroid however isn't a great distance from the Earth so the size difference is only about a few thousand miles at most. Thus the correction to Mercury size which is close to Mars size, while Pluto is closer to the size of the moon. No, because a T-Rex is a complex life form. It simply means they have a huge data base to draw from but that took time to develop. Otherwise they would have gone straight to humans from the beginning.Also, when you are trying to get something from evolution it is generally the rule to interfere as little as possible other than guiding the general course it is taking. Never mind the quote specifically says they manipulated the ecosystem!!! Ecosystem is the environment!!! Yet somehow you jump from that to direct bio-engineering? Yeah sure, believe the incredibly sloppy and best way to mess up an experiment that most definitely doesn't limit itself to the ecosystem to be the likely possibility. No, your reasoning is not logical. You are drawing a conclusion opposite to what is shown, which is not logical. It's guessing and drawing up conclusion simply on possibilities instead of likely probabilities!A lot of things are possible, you can suddunly quantum tunnel to the otherside of the planet according to quantum physics. It'll just take a time period longer than the predicted lifespan of the universe for it to happen. Doesn't mean it will happen and doesn't mean you can say that is a strong possibility. Course your theory isn't that far off of a possibility but it still goes against everything that is being shown. Everything if you just thought about it. They couldn't do that without developing a data base of biological designs.But data bases don't build themselves, it takes time and research to create data bases and they would need an extensive one to zoaform. Especially to create something as advance as Archanfel, which they said was the result of the culmination of all their research. The point of the zoaform also dismisses your argument that they just whipped up one when the fact is they took an older design that had naturally evolved and simply recreated it. It's the same as us taking the design to an old WWII tank and building a new one that looks the same but has modern technology in it. It doesn't change the fact it took a lot of technological evolution to create the original tank and doesn't mean we could always have whipped one up. It only means we had developed it and can create it again if we wanted to. As to actual People in our society, they did make references to actual People but the fact is the story isn't set in a specific time. Remember Takaya started it in the mid 80's and according to the Manga only a few years have passed but it has been over 20 years for us. So exactly who would you have him present in the Manga that wouldn't nail the time period and force him to account for all the time that has passed? And if you can't suspend belief, even for a moment, then you probably don't have much of an imagination, no insult intended just an observation because that is part of the point of enjoying reading such things as the Guyver Manga in the first place. If you can't get into the story then you can't fully enjoy it, this is true of any good story. Really, it's like enjoying watching the X-Files, it may be wild and far fetched but is based with a grain of truth using real world examples to make it so you don't immediately recognize it for fiction without thinking about it for more than a second. Course some episodes were less believable than others but you get my point. You want total fantasy then don't watch or read something that even remotely classified as a sci-fi then. Takaya uses names from history, he uses actual locations to show what is happening. The battles in Japan can even be placed side by side actual photos of Japan and you will see the same buildings in the same locations as shown in the Manga. Showing an attention to detail that simply can't be dismissed. If Takaya is vague, it is on purpose and to not distract from the story. But when he does use things, like showing primordial Earth, it's for the definite purpose of showing us how the story would fit into our own understanding of the world and its history. He didn't create a universe in which the Creators came to Earth and just created humans. He created a story that blends in with our own world history and twists them around to create a different origin in which aliens not only visited Earth but were responsible for our existence. Like how he uses zoanoids to explain all the legends of shapeshifters throughout human history, like werewolves, etc. Again showing how he tries to integrate his story into our own world and to explain things we would otherwise dismiss as just myths and legends. In the X-Day issue, the Navy ships were given names of actual ships. Just some like the Carrier had recently been decommissioned at the time and thus could be written about being destroyed without any real world repurcussions. On point E, fact is the atmosphere during the dinosaur era was much more oxygenated than when humans showed up. It's one of the reasons they grew so big!!! But they changed the whole planet when they killed off the dinosaurs and that includes the atmospheric percentages of oxygen, which was probably one of the reasons they used a meteor to do it since it killed both the dinosaurs and a lot of the planet life. Which is why they said the T-Rex was discontinued and wasn't compatable with the present atmosphere. Lowering the oxygen level also ensures the remaining life forms wouldn't also grow to massive proportions, which suited the Creators admitted change in goals to get what eventually becomes human beings. All of which shows Takaya was following a logical progression in describing what the Creators were doing and why. Simple, look at countries like South Korea. Before the Korean War it was mostly farmers and such, but now they have industry and are even competing with Japan. Companies like Samsung, Kia, etc are now known around the world. Showing a level of advancement that was far faster than say the US. The US doesn't have Maglev trains, it doesn't even have bullet trains. Many of our hospitals were build up to a century ago and are still in use. The NYC subway is just one example, other places in the world like France sewer systems is centuries old. Even New York City's systems date back over a century. The only places you see anything really new is places that had been destroyed for one reason or another. Simply put People don't replace things just because there are better things now, especially if it will cost money to do so. Like replacing a bridge even though it had been build up to a century ago and doesn't do well with modern traffic conditions. The Aerol Gel demonstrates how something that has a clear advantage and would revolutionize the market of insulation with a material nearly as light as air but can withstand extreme heat of over 600 degrees doesn't immediately get adopted by developed nations that already invested in tried and true technology that works but is far older tech and far less efficient. Yes computers are advancing quite rapidly but it is practically the only US industry that still is developing rapidly. Not to mention many of the factories aren't in the US but third world nations so how much can actually be credited to the US versus just taking advantage of developing nations? Never mind how many scientist working in the field were born American? Like when you call for tech support, are you talking to an American or someone in India who just mimics a US accent? When was the last time NASA sent a mission to the Moon? Has space technology rapidly developed in the last 50 years or stagnated and limited itself to research? Course progress hasn't stopped, but not everything is moving at an Accelerated rate of development like you said it was. Take for example an idealized vision of the future like Minority Report, minus the justice system of course it depicts that in just a few decades we would have cars driving up the side of building along with many other revolutionary tech. The thing is tech wise it may be all true but to implement that vision would require the entire present system, roads, building designs, etc to all be updated and that would cost so much we won't actually get that level of technology for close to a century from now instead of just a few decades as the movie predicts. This is the difference from what is possible to what is practical. Every factor I mentioned that would slow progress of the Creators are valid and present in what we are shown in the Manga. So unless the Creators made some changes to how they did things and diversified more, and like you admitted they already have very advance technology that would be hard to top. All means it is likely there advancement is slow compared to our own. I:Enjoying the fantasy aspect is one thing but the fact remains the story does draw upon real world elements to make the story more believable. Just with a fantasy element added as otherwise Takaya might as well have placed the story on another planet and not bothered with any human history comparisons. Again, imaginations to place ourselves in the story is the primary point. Otherwise Sho could have been like Luke in Star Wars and grown up on an alien world. Fact is we have a history filled with myth and legends and Takaya just used it to give his story a little bit more believability. Like nay sayers would ask why we have never seen or heard any evidense of zoanoids for example. Takaya gave an answer by saying all the myths and legends were based on zoanoids. He basically filled any holes in the story that way and made it all the easier to fantasize about the story he was creating. Btw, it doesn't matter that it irks you that the Earth is over 4 Billion years old. Because the Earth is over 4 Billion years old. What are you, a creationist who believes the Earth was created in 7 days or something? Sure, let's ignore all scientific evidence that says otherwise and just go with your theory. Is this really what you want us to do? We got carbon dating, we got magnetic layers (since Earth's magnetic field flips every few million years). We also got continental drift, which is a process still going on and can be measured. Silha island in the Manga was created by continential drift, do you have the slightest clue how long that takes? Hint, a lot longer than 10's of thousands of years. Never mind our time line of biological evolution is also backed by continental drift as species got segregated onto different land masses. Here's a website with an animated globe that shows how the land masses has shifted position since the time period that the Creators arrived to now. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/geology/anim1.html Besides technically speaking the Earth is 4.5 Billion years old. It just took about 500 million for the Earth to cool down enough for water, etc to be in place so the materials to form life were available. Another Billion years more before anything complex formed, etc. It was a long process. We also have Earth rocks which we have definitely analyzed to be 3.8 Billion years old, while we also have meteorites up to 4.5 million years ago giving us a time scale between the time solid material formed in our system and when the Earth had cooled enough to support water, etc. There is also the fact we have fossils of primitive life forms in rock we know are up to 2.5 Billion years old. So the time frame isn't an assumption. At least for when the Creators landed and the establishment of the building blocks of life as we know it as the atmosphere was oxygenated and the temperature became moderate enough to support life. So the Creators would have to have terraformed the planet just to set up shop. Not to mention they couldn't really accelerate the planet cooling, which along with the terraforming would have taken them at least a billion years before they could even have started evolving life forms more complex than bacteria. No, just logical observation.We for example know the Creators contacted their superiors back home because that is what they told Archanfel, who would most definitely have noticed if any ships left Earth or arrived. The fact he didn't and they got an answers means they didn't need to leave to communicate with the rest of their people. Second manipulating the ecosystem is a constant affair, especially on a planetary scale open to influences from random meteor strikes, solar flares, etc. They had to stay to monitor things and to gather information on their experiment. Even with their technology they couldn't control things like we can say a petri-dish inside a well equiped labatory. And they did say they achieved their creation via manipulating the ecosystem, not the life directly. SE's theory that they may have put themselves into stasis makes more sense as then they could be awakened in a moment's notice if anything called for their direct intervention. But also suffers the fact they wouldn't have anyone to keep records if they went into stasis. We can also make note of the fauna that was growing on the Relics, indicating they had been there for a very long time. We also have the fact the Relic at Relic's Point was beneath a mountain, something that could not happen without millions of years of time for the land mass to change that much, which along with Silha island being created by techtonic plate movement both showing the time the Creators left alone would have been a very long time ago, longer than what Barcus stated was Archanfel's nap time. I could really go in depth to why I don't think your theory works but I'm not in the habit of doing the thinking for other People when what I already stated is more than sufficient. Sure, we can entertain the possibilities but we should also keep in mind what is likely from what is only a possibility, not to mention the actual intent of Takaya and what aspects of the story he is telling us versus what we may think of these characters.