>>50231804So where's this tear falling into the water reference I didn't see it?
https://youtu.be/1a04Tizpmm4?t=10No, the problem is that you fundamentally don't understand what a retcon is. It needs to be undeniable and direct proof for it being a retcon like my earlier example. Simply not bringing it up wouldn't have OBJECTIVELY been a retcon since you can't deny its existence. All it would have amounted to is that it would have been an odd decision.