Let's see, the legacies to Nick's children: I never said any of those things in the trailer belonged to Renard. I don't know where you keep getting this from.
Nick and Renard not trusting one another: There is no evidence to support that Nick and Renard ended up distrusting one another. That is your conjecture, 20 years later.
Renard is dead 20 years later: Yes, you could say that. I don't think he is, however. I do however, believe Renard and Nick could have been very good friends.
I remember this now and I recall the hoopla. Thanks for posting. Syscrash is right. There is nothing to support that Diana was referring to Nick as "Dad" at the end. Thank you for clarifying.
Grimm books, the trailer, and equipment: It *is* conjecture that the books belonged to Nick. I'm not saying they aren't his, I'm saying he could have easily given it all to the kiddies. There's *nothing* stating either way. So it is conjecture. On both of our parts. If you really want to get technical, wouldn't all of it still belong to Marie then? Even though she's a ghost, she's still around. After all you said Kelly could entrust Nick with the stick. Can't Marie still have her trailer and contents then?
Kelly and his embellishments: Grimms are killlers. Whether the killings are "righteous" or no, that depends on the circumstances. I do however, believe, Kelly embellished his father's exploits. And if he left out certain "exploits", such as how mums and daddums got together, then he isn't telling the entire truth, is he?
Renard the grimm: I still have to laugh at the indignation this statement presents. Even funnier is how you try to explain your way into proving he could never be a grimm. Sorry, if Diana could be one, that tells me Renard's influence is there somewhere. Would he become a grimm? I still haven't thought that through yet. I can only say it appears he wasn't against *her* becoming one. But that is purely speculation.
I've made plenty of speculations without any hint of evidence, what's one more speculation for me?: Um, nothing. But I'm no different than you or anyone else in that aspect. We all speculate.
The diaries aka sacred texts: Okay, where was that put forth in the series?
Nick entrusted with the staff: Nick took it from a dead wesen. I wouldn't call that entrusting, more taking possession in the owner's death. He *did* however, steal the shard. No entrustment from anyone there.
Speculation: All you've done is taken the previous 20 years of Grimm and stuffed that into your "here's my proof" statements. We don't know what's happened in 20 years. That is ambiguous.
I think we're done here, right?
Nick and Renard not trusting one another: There is no evidence to support that Nick and Renard ended up distrusting one another. That is your conjecture, 20 years later.
Renard is dead 20 years later: Yes, you could say that. I don't think he is, however. I do however, believe Renard and Nick could have been very good friends.
Quote:Re: It's the same interview that you mentioned about everyone being one big happy family. Notice that G & K did not deny that it was Nick and Adalind that Diana was referring to in the end:
But as we see in the flashforward, we see that Diana and Kelly are carrying on the Grimm work, and they mention that Adalind and Nick — as well as the triplets — are involved. What can you tell me about how everyone else ended up?
KOUF | They’re all just one big, happy family, fighting evil together.
I remember this now and I recall the hoopla. Thanks for posting. Syscrash is right. There is nothing to support that Diana was referring to Nick as "Dad" at the end. Thank you for clarifying.
Grimm books, the trailer, and equipment: It *is* conjecture that the books belonged to Nick. I'm not saying they aren't his, I'm saying he could have easily given it all to the kiddies. There's *nothing* stating either way. So it is conjecture. On both of our parts. If you really want to get technical, wouldn't all of it still belong to Marie then? Even though she's a ghost, she's still around. After all you said Kelly could entrust Nick with the stick. Can't Marie still have her trailer and contents then?
Kelly and his embellishments: Grimms are killlers. Whether the killings are "righteous" or no, that depends on the circumstances. I do however, believe, Kelly embellished his father's exploits. And if he left out certain "exploits", such as how mums and daddums got together, then he isn't telling the entire truth, is he?
Renard the grimm: I still have to laugh at the indignation this statement presents. Even funnier is how you try to explain your way into proving he could never be a grimm. Sorry, if Diana could be one, that tells me Renard's influence is there somewhere. Would he become a grimm? I still haven't thought that through yet. I can only say it appears he wasn't against *her* becoming one. But that is purely speculation.
I've made plenty of speculations without any hint of evidence, what's one more speculation for me?: Um, nothing. But I'm no different than you or anyone else in that aspect. We all speculate.
The diaries aka sacred texts: Okay, where was that put forth in the series?
Nick entrusted with the staff: Nick took it from a dead wesen. I wouldn't call that entrusting, more taking possession in the owner's death. He *did* however, steal the shard. No entrustment from anyone there.
Speculation: All you've done is taken the previous 20 years of Grimm and stuffed that into your "here's my proof" statements. We don't know what's happened in 20 years. That is ambiguous.
I think we're done here, right?
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.