Board Thread:Off Topic/@comment-27447621-20160730160356/@comment-25936766-20160827195254

Many pantheons have a god of the sea. Not all of these gods are like Neptune.

If the only similarity was "they are god of the sea", then why is it translated to Neptune instead of Niord or Varuna? His point was "This never-ever-mentioned pantheon has a god that is pretty much Remnant Neptune", not "this never-ever-mentioned pantheon has a god of the sea, obviously like Neptune".

Note the difference. The former implies the god is, in general, pretty much Neptune, god of the sea, in terms of general traits and personality, just with a different name (in other words, this trope more or less). The latter implies that the god is just a god of the sea, like Neptune, but that's it, and yet he's obviously translated to Neptune because of it, instead of Niord or Varuna which are also gods of the sea. It's not like Neptune is the only sea god in history.

What makes it too hand-wavey though, which I thought was clear by now, is the "never-ever mentioned pantheon" part. It doesn't just expect, but demands that we assume that since Neptune is called Neptune, there's also a planet called Neptune in their star system, even if it has never been mentioned or implied and thus has no evidence. Or that just because he's called Neptune, there's also a god that is like Neptune in some Remnantish Pantheon, even though it has never been mentioned or implied in any way and thus has no evidence.

Like I told Maki: It's basically waving their hand like a Jedi doing a mind trick and expecting the audience to be Stormtroopers.