Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26408630-20150313212317/@comment-14512598-20150317003347

Yoshimickster wrote: OnlyOnTuesdays88 wrote: But no I definitely don't think that's the case. I'm still sticking with the theory I linked to in the third comment. Makes a lot more sense. Not to mention that, while the likelihood of having twins can be genetic, the odds of three generations in a row being twins is very unlikely.

Not to mention what you said doesn't make sense. He had a kid, went to search for the kid, and then had a kid? I mean that's possible but it doesn't go with your theory.

No I meant one of Stan(?)'s possible twin sons had a kid(Soos), and when Soos was four went on a cross-country search looking for him probably out of abandonment issues( IRONY). Sorry if my theory was worded improperly, I was SUPER tired when I typed it, woke up during REM sleep- NOT GOOD!

Also the genetic twin theory is one I subscribe to, but it is shakey, as is my previous. Just a theory, A CARTOON THEORY! Oh I'm almost entirely sure there's like no chance of the Soos being a pines theory to be true.

It's just... it'd take a lot to push that from the current position. Too much of a stretch.