The Pixar theory

Vote Neg:a) The burden is on Pro to prove that the Pixar theory is correctb) Pro fails to meet this burden--the existence of Easter Eggs are more indicative of a fun idea for the animators than some kind of overrarching plot. c) VOTE CON: Pro hasn't upheld his burden. I. The theory is untenable and inconsistentThe Pixar theory has multiple flaws that I'll elaborate on: a) Wood: The theory claims that wood has special powers allowing one (in this case the monsters from Monsters inc) to go back in time. Nowhere in the Pixar Universe is wood shown to have any special powers whatsoever, let alone allowing time travel magic. b) To reconcile the theory with Pixars upcoming movie "The Good Dinosaur" about sentient Dinosaurs who keep Humans as pets, the article claims that Pixars universe must be one where the Dinosaurs were never wiped out and humans and dinosaurs evolved seperately. The problem with this is that Dinosaurs are extinct in all of the other Pixar films and there are no references to a time when humans were mere playthings of Dinosaurs and indeed Dinosaurs are viewed as complete jokes in the Pixar universe, look at Rex from Toy Story. c) The Incredibles: Nowhere in any other film is there a reference to super humans. Okay, maybe they died out as it was implied that they were, but even so the article states that The Incredibles takes place in an alternate 1960s (meaning the opening was in the 1950s), and Toy Story takes place in the 1990s. Why would Andy worship fake, lame hero's like Woody or Buzz when there were, or were in the very recent past, real life superheros? Moreover why would Woody have his own popular show in what was implied to be the 1950s when there were *actual real life supers* still active in the field until at least the mid 50s? d) Cars: In no other Pixar film are machines other than AI like WALL-E shown to be sentient. Even if they were, they didn't look like the vehicles in the Cars with their faces and other anthropomorphic features. The theory gives no real reason on why a) Humanlike cars similar to modern day vehicles would be created and b) Why far in the future (the Theory claims Cars is around the same time as WALL-E when humans have left the Earth) Cars still run on fossil fuels as they do in Cars 2 and why they resemble modern machines when Eve and WALL-E don't.e) The Trailer: The theory claims that a bugs life takes place shortly after WALL-E when humans are just repopulating the Earth and they are not plentiful. The problem with this is that in A Bugs Life Flick passes by a trailer that is evidently in good enough condition to have a working bug killing lamp. In Monsters Inc., the same trailer can be seen in slightly better condition where Randall is sent. But since we know that, according to the theory, A Bugs Life takes place at least several hundred years after humans had left the Earth, because they had at least returned to some extent as a bug in the city was seen with a sign saying a kid pulled off his wings. There's *no way* that a poorly constructed trailer could remain recognizable after hundreds of years, let alone a working bug lamp.f) General incosistencies There are just tons of general inconsistencies like Toys in Toy Story being sentient but not in any of the other movies, or Bugs in a Bugs life.That's enough for now. The resolution is negated.