The fact that it shows no evidence of ever being so closely related to the pole would seem to suggest the pole alignment is contemporary to YM, rather than the origin of WC as a whole.
Never said it was the origin of WC as a whole! Geez! And it would not suggest that at all.
All it suggests is that other lineages are not based on the pole. They could have other origins, or just evolved differently. That's for them to discover.
There is no reason to believe YMVT boxing was not always based on the pole. It's the only one I'm aware of that matches this pole exactly. I have not seen another one with the exact pole method, suggesting lots of expansion and evolution on more than just the boxing, whereas YMVT has remained relatively simple. Easy to do when based on a short, simple weapon theory. Deviation is immediately obvious and avoidable.
That's good logic, but I consider some of it subjective. There are conclusions stated without sufficient support shown in the post (like the statement that it's too integrated to have been added - that's a conclusion, rather than evidence).
The conclusion is supported by the evidence.
I'm not saying you're wrong in your conclusion, just the the chain of logic is either incomplete (you left out some of your middle-men in the chain)
Like whom?
or there are fallacies in it (using unproven conclusions as evidence).
The conclusions are supported by the evidence.
Except that there has never been substantial evidence of aliens. We have lots of evidence that, a) arts evolve, b) arts sometimes start from empty-hand methods without weapons, c) arts sometimes gain weapons, and d) arts sometimes evolve into something new without branching to leave the original behind. This is the fallacy I referred to earlier (false equivalence).
There is no evidence of one that has done any of that in this case.
While we can't say any of those things definitively happened with VT, we also can't make a definitive claim about it being weapons-originated.
No one has.
No, you stated that they are equivalent (that is a fiat statement unless evidence is used to support it).
No, I explained how they are equivalent, i.e. one based on observable facts of existing elements, the other based on indemonstrable variables.
If you want to say it's possible that a god created the universe (or a preexisting base style helped form VT), then you have to demonstrate that a god exists (the base style) before you can discuss what it might have done (helped form VT).
You have not done that, so I can't accept your assertion that it is even possible.
Maybe the base style evolved or died out and can no longer be found. Maybe the universe-creating god worked his magic and then disappeared or expired and can no longer be found.
It can't be investigated either way. So, that it is even possible is not a rationally held position.
You just said there was no evidence it ever was tightly aligned with the pole. Given that, what makes it more likely it was, than that it wasn't?
What? I think you're getting tired...
I said there's no evidence non-YM WC systems were ever tightly aligned with the pole, and they certainly aren't now.
What I said about YMVT is that it is tightly aligned with the pole now, and there's no evidence that it hasn't always been.
Follow?
I don't recall seeing him say the hands couldn't work independently.
Here:
Where in the pole does a person use 2 arms at the same time doing two very different motions?
This suggests we shouldn't be doing that if we're based on the pole. Pretty silly, huh?
VT is a concept-based system, so we don't have to act like we're holding an invisible pole when we fight barehanded.
He doesn't seem to get that conceptual part, which is odd for a WC practitioner.
VT boxing is a "two pole" method. The arms function as the shaft of the poles. We need not pretend to hold anything.
