An apology

[Tagger 2,722]

So yeah, I need to be up front here, I've made a huge mistake. So basically what happened is that in an article talking about Encarnacion, I talked about a guy in a hood who had a "warm presence" about him, so that I could at least refer to the presence of Reencarnacion in the minors. Now the reason that he has the warm presence is because, as my last media article kinda alluded to, the guys been set on fire, but it actually turns out that they didn't kill him with the fire, and he's now a guy who has like no skin and is just on fire so...so he's Ghost Rider, but he doesn't ride or ghost basically, that's the gist of things here. 

 

But obviously there's a problem here, and that problem is that I mentioned the presence of the hooded man with a warm presence while Encarnacion was still perfectly fine, and that person is Reencarnacion, but Reencarnacion is what Encarnacion used to be if you follow me? So basically, when I mentioned Reencarnacion, I shouldn't have, cause there's no way he could've existed. I mean I could've maybe done a retcon and be like "Oh the guy in the hood was Till Baumann" but then you'd be like "Why the fuck does Till Baumann have a warm presence" and then you go find Till Baumann, and Till Baumann's like "Wait, I don't have a warm presence" and then I'm fucked, y'know? So basically, I need to apologize for mentioning the man in the hood, it was a bad idea, I know you guys take the VHL mythos very seriously and me coming in saying "Ahh, there's a hooded figure Ahh!" when I'm trying to explain something that shouldn't actually exist in the first place, that's wrong, that's me lying to you guys.

 

So basically, the four of you who saw me write about the hooded figure, please just forget it happened, there's no hooded figure, please shut up. And then the other four of you who are reading this like "Wait, what hooded figure" because you didn't read the other stuff that mentioned the hooded figure but now you know of the presence of the hooded figure of this, please forget that I mentioned the hooded figure, please do not respond to this thread about the hooded figure, please do not like this post talking about the hooded figure, he didn't happen. Even if you look back now and say "But no, here's this link where you talk about a hooded figure", there's no hooded figure. There really isn't. 

[Phil 5,129]

Okay - I think I got this straight:

 

Encarnation burned in a fire.

 

He rose from the ashes in a hooded cloak.

 

He drew his hood back to reveal Reencarnation.

 

And then killed Till Baumann.

 

 

Awesome. 

[Tagger 2,722]

Okay - I think I got this straight:

 

Encarnation burned in a fire.

 

He rose from the ashes in a hooded cloak.

 

He drew his hood back to reveal Reencarnation.

 

And then killed Till Baumann.

 

 

Awesome. 

I SAID NOT TO REPLY OR LIKE

 

But you're right and you're wrong, like the thing is yeah the idea was he rose from the ashes in a hooded cloak, but the guy in the hooded cloak was mentioned while Encarnacion was still alive, so the thing is really that doesn't make sense.

 

UNLESS, when he gets set on fire he also becomes a time cop, goes back in time to that point where he's mentioned as being in a hood, and then he catches back up in time with when Encarnacion gets burned, but then when the live Reencarnacion goes back in time, the one that has already gone back in time comes in and then carries on from where the live Reencarnacion was before he went back in time.

 

And then he kills Till Baumann. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That might work idk