<div class="quote"><i>Nearhza wrote:
<div class="quote">SummerScoutVenus wrote:
<div class="quote">Nearhza wrote:
<div class="quote">SaltyPearl7152 wrote:
the only theories i will discredit immediantly without any second thought are the _____ is/contains pink diamond theories, and the theory of rhodonite containing pink diamond's pearl, as she says she was owned by a morganite and the gem placements don't match</i></div>
Welp, we have no confirmation that the gem placements of the pearls have to parallel their perspective diamond. The odds are still fifty fifty. Gems can also belong to multiple people if their job is to serve--like a Pearl. Rhodonite's Pearl could've belonged to Pink, then after Pink's shattering, she could've weant to Morganite, but Morganite was cruel, and thus she connected with Ruby, fused, and became an off color. This is mostly speculative, but valid nonetheless. <p>There's not enough information to discredit the Pink Pearl--Rhodonite theory just yet.  </p> </div>no, i mean, it's unreasonable to think that a Morganite would have the power to discard a Diamond's Pearl. there's no way Rhodonite's Pearl was Pink Diamond's at any point.</div>The Power? Wha? She could just get rid of a Pearl that she has no use for. Without the Diamond, a Pearl is just a Pearl. I think it's unreasonable to think that the prestige would carry over. This is another example of the overconfidnece I was speaking of earlier. "There's no way?" You have just as much info as I do, and I find that conclusion to be full of temerity. </div> <p>pink pearl is likely being held somewhere safe as blue cares about everything that belonged to pink and pink pearl was hers. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Zxxllli wrote:
<div class="quote">Nearhza wrote:
<div class="quote">SummerScoutVenus wrote:
<div class="quote">Nearhza wrote:
<div class="quote">SaltyPearl7152 wrote:
the only theories i will discredit immediantly without any second thought are the _____ is/contains pink diamond theories, and the theory of rhodonite containing pink diamond's pearl, as she says she was owned by a morganite and the gem placements don't match</i></div>
Welp, we have no confirmation that the gem placements of the pearls have to parallel their perspective diamond. The odds are still fifty fifty. Gems can also belong to multiple people if their job is to serve--like a Pearl. Rhodonite's Pearl could've belonged to Pink, then after Pink's shattering, she could've weant to Morganite, but Morganite was cruel, and thus she connected with Ruby, fused, and became an off color. This is mostly speculative, but valid nonetheless. <p>There's not enough information to discredit the Pink Pearl--Rhodonite theory just yet.  </p> </div>no, i mean, it's unreasonable to think that a Morganite would have the power to discard a Diamond's Pearl. there's no way Rhodonite's Pearl was Pink Diamond's at any point.</div>The Power? Wha? She could just get rid of a Pearl that she has no use for. Without the Diamond, a Pearl is just a Pearl. I think it's unreasonable to think that the prestige would carry over. This is another example of the overconfidnece I was speaking of earlier. "There's no way?" You have just as much info as I do, and I find that conclusion to be full of temerity.</div>pink pearl is likely being held somewhere safe as blue cares about everything that belonged to pink and pink pearl was hers. </div> <p>I could see that.  </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Fishsticks03 wrote:
I think that the gem that keeps changing shape is a type of gem specially made for shapeshifting, which includes the shape of the gemstone. One of these may have been Pink's killer, shifted as Rose Quartz.</i></div>
<p>......that's a joke, right? </p>

<div class="quote"><i>SurrealKangaroo wrote:
I think there is one Pearl. The three triangles could be Peridots, but I'm not sure. I'm also not sure about the Diamond shaped one. I also with there was some confirmation on what the last gen is supposed to be shaped like.</i></div>
<p>I think they can't be peridots, because the peridot we know has facets on the edge of her gem (not really visible in the cartoon because it's covered under her skin) and doesn't have 3 triangle shapes on her gem. Also, the peridot we know has a gem that is slightly rounded at the top, while Fluorite's triangle gems aren't. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>RogerBoii64 wrote:
<div class="quote">SurrealKangaroo wrote:
I think there is one Pearl. The three triangles could be Peridots, but I'm not sure. I'm also not sure about the Diamond shaped one. I also with there was some confirmation on what the last gen is supposed to be shaped like.</i></div>
I think they can't be peridots, because the peridot we know has facets on the edge of her gem (not really visible in the cartoon because it's covered under her skin) and doesn't have 3 triangle shapes on her gem. Also, the peridot we know has a gem that is slightly rounded at the top, while Fluorite's triangle gems aren't. </div> <p>i definitely agree they aren't Peridots because the shape is wrong, but we've seen from Opal that Gems' gemstones can gain different color patterns in fusion. (Pearl's gemstone gains an extra triangle of color that it doesn't usually have when she is part of Opal.) </p>

<div class="quote"><i>SummerScoutVenus wrote:
<div class="quote">RogerBoii64 wrote:
<div class="quote">SurrealKangaroo wrote:
I think there is one Pearl. The three triangles could be Peridots, but I'm not sure. I'm also not sure about the Diamond shaped one. I also with there was some confirmation on what the last gen is supposed to be shaped like.</i></div>
I think they can't be peridots, because the peridot we know has facets on the edge of her gem (not really visible in the cartoon because it's covered under her skin) and doesn't have 3 triangle shapes on her gem. Also, the peridot we know has a gem that is slightly rounded at the top, while Fluorite's triangle gems aren't.</div>i definitely agree they aren't Peridots because the shape is wrong, but we've seen from Opal that Gems' gemstones can gain different color patterns in fusion. (Pearl's gemstone gains an extra triangle of color that it doesn't usually have when she is part of Opal.) </div> <p>I'm assuming neihter of you read anything I pointed out earlier in the thread, but I addressed all of those points already. </p>

<p>The circular one is most likely a Sapphire  other than having that circular facet. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Nearhza wrote:
<div class="quote">SummerScoutVenus wrote:
<div class="quote">RogerBoii64 wrote:
<div class="quote">SurrealKangaroo wrote:
I think there is one Pearl. The three triangles could be Peridots, but I'm not sure. I'm also not sure about the Diamond shaped one. I also with there was some confirmation on what the last gen is supposed to be shaped like.</i></div>
I think they can't be peridots, because the peridot we know has facets on the edge of her gem (not really visible in the cartoon because it's covered under her skin) and doesn't have 3 triangle shapes on her gem. Also, the peridot we know has a gem that is slightly rounded at the top, while Fluorite's triangle gems aren't.</div>i definitely agree they aren't Peridots because the shape is wrong, but we've seen from Opal that Gems' gemstones can gain different color patterns in fusion. (Pearl's gemstone gains an extra triangle of color that it doesn't usually have when she is part of Opal.)</div>I'm assuming neihter of you read anything I pointed out earlier in the thread, but I addressed all of those points already. </div> <p>no, don't worry, i read everything in this thread before responding!! it's just that none of your points really amounted to more than "we don't know it <i>isn't</i> a Peridot". like, yeah, Fluorite's two chest gems <i>could</i> be very poorly drawn Peridot gems, or two <i>misshapen</i> Peridot gems, and i guess it <i>could</i> be possible that despite having two in the fusion, Fluorite being six gems is enough to dilute any Peridot-based traits.... but Occam's Razor ought to apply. the simplest solution is most likely to be correct: the two chest gems aren't Peridots, because that's what makes the most sense. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>SummerScoutVenus wrote:
<div class="quote">Nearhza wrote:
<div class="quote">SummerScoutVenus wrote:
<div class="quote">RogerBoii64 wrote:
<div class="quote">SurrealKangaroo wrote:
I think there is one Pearl. The three triangles could be Peridots, but I'm not sure. I'm also not sure about the Diamond shaped one. I also with there was some confirmation on what the last gen is supposed to be shaped like.</i></div>
I think they can't be peridots, because the peridot we know has facets on the edge of her gem (not really visible in the cartoon because it's covered under her skin) and doesn't have 3 triangle shapes on her gem. Also, the peridot we know has a gem that is slightly rounded at the top, while Fluorite's triangle gems aren't.</div>i definitely agree they aren't Peridots because the shape is wrong, but we've seen from Opal that Gems' gemstones can gain different color patterns in fusion. (Pearl's gemstone gains an extra triangle of color that it doesn't usually have when she is part of Opal.)</div>I'm assuming neihter of you read anything I pointed out earlier in the thread, but I addressed all of those points already.</div>no, don't worry, i read everything in this thread before responding!! it's just that none of your points really amounted to more than "we don't know it <i>isn't</i> a Peridot". like, yeah, Fluorite's two chest gems <i>could</i> be very poorly drawn Peridot gems, or two <i>misshapen</i> Peridot gems, and i guess it <i>could</i> be possible that despite having two in the fusion, Fluorite being six gems is enough to dilute any Peridot-based traits.... but Occam's Razor ought to apply. the simplest solution is most likely to be correct: the two chest gems aren't Peridots, because that's what makes the most sense. </div> <p>I disagree that it makes the most sense for a few reasons, but first liet me just say thank you for an intellectually grounded response! </p><p>1. Occam's Razor only applies for situations where complicated solutionas are unnecessarily taxing. It doesn't simply mean that simple answeres are preferred. It is no more or less likely that those triangles are not poorly drawn peridots, at least not because of any afforementioned reasoning. </p><p>2. I pointed out that Gems of the same type can have different shaped gems, like the two Jaspers we know of, so the trend of the gem shape correlating to gem type doesn't necessarily hold weight, and although this is where you may apply be considering applying Occam's Razor, it is still not wise to do so. Why? Because the point is not to prove that they are or are not Peridot gems. My point is to prove that there is no way we can use words like most sense, likely, most likely, and so on with all of this ambiguity. That's what makes a simple answer inplausible, without even factoring in that the Crewniverse has been intentionally misleading and simultaneously proned to dropping clues we're meant to catch in the past.  </p><p>3. Just as you say it could be possible for a fusion to dilute Peridot traits, I think Occam's Razor applies here. In the Two instances where we've seen gems that have four or more fusions, both of them include physical traits that make their gem-parts unidentifyable for the most part. If you look at Alexandrite, there's nothing about her physical appearance that signifantly resembles Ruby, Sapphire, Pearl, or Amethyst individually. I think it would make the most sense for us to then infer that as a gem continues to add to its fusion, the individual traits becomes more indistinguishable. Wouldn't you agree? </p><p>So that's why I think my "we don't know it isn't a Peridot" is a bit more than just devil's advocate. I genuinely mean that we have no way of knowing what the gem is, so to disregard one while using words like likely and most likely, doesn't follow logically. </p><p>4. Plus, I made the point about how out of all the gems we've seen, Peridot's gem is in fact the closest in shape. It's very close actually, in my opinion. If we were using Occam's Razor in the way you suggest, it would make the most sense for us to say that it is actually most likely that they ARE Peridots, given that we also continue to consider that gems of the same type don't have to have identical gems shapes.  </p>

<p>I think one of them is a Pearl, but I don't think these 3 other gems are Peridots </p>