--> if somebody says "there COULD BE" an elephant on the lawn .. and I look, and I see no evidence, one way or the other, of an elephant on the lawn .. then we can safely conclude there is NO elephant on the lawn.I am not saying THERE IS a subplot I'm saying there COULD BE a subplot.
unless you can quote things from TFA to refute the possibility of this theory it is all hyperbole to say "watch the film". I did, I still get these ideas every single time.... And if you can please state where you see the evidence using quotes/moments from the film that refute the possibility of anything like this theory being possible...
you are citing the same logic which fueled the salem witch trials.
"unless you can 'prove' that you are NOT a witch, then the possibility remains..."
you can't prove a negative.
the "theory" of evolution, is still just a theory (granted).. but it IS based on evidence. it is not based on a "lack-of-evidence-against-it".
(by the same token I could say: "every time I stare at a photo of the planet Mars, I feel like the grass is probably purple on Mars. unless you can quote things from [the photo] to refute the possibility of this theory, it is all hyperbole to say "watch the [photo]". I did, I still get these ideas every single time.... ")
the lack of evidence against your theory , does not 'support' your theory... it's actually just irrelevant. *shrug*
a theory is only supported by evidence ; not by a "lack of evidence against it"