aruthelocallibraryhermit

[aruthelocallibraryhermit]

I feel like the main problem with that theory is the fact that the springlock suits were light enough for someone to wear them as costumes. It wouldn't make sense to add extra machinery for no reason.

Another thing I've noticed about the sprite for Fredbear is that the top half of the head is only held up by two metal pole pieces.

So the top half would almost definitely be fairly light, since if it was heavier, there would likely be more support for the head.

Overall, I hope this doesn't come off as rude, and I apologise if it does, I only wish to work with people to help discover the different aspects of lore surrounding these games.

Hope you have a wonderful day!

The Bite Of 83 Was Not Caused By An Accidental Springlock Failure

I was reading the Fnaf wiki last night and I noticed something

The wiki seems to attribute the Crying Child's death to an accidental springlock failure caused by his tears loosening the mechanisms.

This is something that I've often seen used in theories and retellings of the bite, but this would not be feasibly possible.

This is due to one simple fact,

The springlock suits were in animatronic mode.

For a springlock failure to occur, the suits would need to be in suit mode, because, while in animatronic mode, all of the springlocks would be disengaged.

We know that the suits were in animatronic mode, because:

1. We have seen what a person wearing the Fredbear suit looks like, and the suit on stage is notably empty.

2. If someone was in the suit, you'd think they'd have the common sense to, at the very least, move away from the child being stuffed in their suit's mouth? Or stop the kids from doing it at all?

3. The bullies would probably have the basic knowledge to not try and pull a 'prank' right in front of an adult, and since we've established that you can see when someone is performing in Fredbear, the bullies probably wouldn't take that kind of risk.

4. We've seen what happens when springlocks fail with someone inside.

If there was somehow someone performing inside of Fredbear, the Crying Child's blood wouldn't be the only one that stained the suit.

With all this evidence, I believe I can safely say that the bite of 83 was not caused by an accidental springlock failure.

However there is still one more thing I'd like to discuss.

If the bite wasn't caused by an accidental springlock failure, how did the suit generate enough force to kill the Crying Child?

The way the springlocks work is that they push the various electronics aside, and lock them in place to make room for the wearer. The wearer is able to move around in the suit, despite all of the technology, meaning has to at least be light enough for your average adult the lift and move around in.

How does this relate?

If the suit is light enough to be worn, the weight of the upper head coming down would not be able to generate enough force to crush the Crying Child's skull like a potato chip.

It might hurt, or give him a concussion, but kiddo would not be cosplaying a pancake.

Therefore, in this scenario, there are only three feasible ways that the bite of 83 could have occurred:

A. William Afton and Henry Emily are idiots who decided it was a good idea to give their animatronics the bite force to crush skulls.

B. Someone tampered with the animatronic to give it the bite force to crush skulls.

Or C. Someone deliberately rewound the head springlocks (at the least) so it would have the bite force to crush skulls. (Though this is unlikely, as the suit probably wouldn't be able to perform in suit mode without a wearer)

While I am unsure of the motives to do so, (As the Fnaf timeline is a mess) I believe that the culprit was likely Afton, as he would have been one of the only ones at the time who knew how to work the springlock suits (Being one of the two designers).

I say Afton, because depending on where the events of Fnaf 4 take place, he could have multiple reasons.

He could have wanted to kill a child using it, or it could be a sort of test run for the funtimes, to see how effective murder via animatronic was.

The above is all speculation however, and is not based in facts. These are merely my musings and hold no merit to the theory. As of now, there is no substantial evidence to confirm or deny Afton's involvement in the bite.

Overall, the bite of 83 could not be caused by an accidental springlock failure, meaning either Afton and Emily were really stupid when designing the suits, or someone tampered with the Fredbear suit to make it deadly.

If I have missed any evidence, feel free to correct me!

Thank you for reading this theory, I hope you have a wonderful day.

#fnaf #fnaf theory #the bite of 83 #have a nice day!

[aruthelocallibraryhermit]

I know this wouldn't happen in canon, but still,

#fnaf #fnaf fanart #fnaf security breach #michael afton #fnaf vanny #fnaf gregory #glamrock freddy #glamrock roxanne

[aruthelocallibraryhermit]

What an interesting new technician, I sure hope nothing bad happens to him, that would be terrible!

#fnaf #fnaf fanart #michael afton #eggs benedict #fnaf sister location #circus baby #ballora #funtime freddy #funtime foxy

[aruthelocallibraryhermit]

The Bite Of 83 Was Not Caused By An Accidental Springlock Failure

I was reading the Fnaf wiki last night and I noticed something

The wiki seems to attribute the Crying Child's death to an accidental springlock failure caused by his tears loosening the mechanisms.

This is something that I've often seen used in theories and retellings of the bite, but this would not be feasibly possible.

This is due to one simple fact,

The springlock suits were in animatronic mode.

For a springlock failure to occur, the suits would need to be in suit mode, because, while in animatronic mode, all of the springlocks would be disengaged.

We know that the suits were in animatronic mode, because:

1. We have seen what a person wearing the Fredbear suit looks like, and the suit on stage is notably empty.

2. If someone was in the suit, you'd think they'd have the common sense to, at the very least, move away from the child being stuffed in their suit's mouth? Or stop the kids from doing it at all?

3. The bullies would probably have the basic knowledge to not try and pull a 'prank' right in front of an adult, and since we've established that you can see when someone is performing in Fredbear, the bullies probably wouldn't take that kind of risk.

4. We've seen what happens when springlocks fail with someone inside.

If there was somehow someone performing inside of Fredbear, the Crying Child's blood wouldn't be the only one that stained the suit.

With all this evidence, I believe I can safely say that the bite of 83 was not caused by an accidental springlock failure.

However there is still one more thing I'd like to discuss.

If the bite wasn't caused by an accidental springlock failure, how did the suit generate enough force to kill the Crying Child?

The way the springlocks work is that they push the various electronics aside, and lock them in place to make room for the wearer. The wearer is able to move around in the suit, despite all of the technology, meaning has to at least be light enough for your average adult the lift and move around in.

How does this relate?

If the suit is light enough to be worn, the weight of the upper head coming down would not be able to generate enough force to crush the Crying Child's skull like a potato chip.

It might hurt, or give him a concussion, but kiddo would not be cosplaying a pancake.

Therefore, in this scenario, there are only three feasible ways that the bite of 83 could have occurred:

A. William Afton and Henry Emily are idiots who decided it was a good idea to give their animatronics the bite force to crush skulls.

B. Someone tampered with the animatronic to give it the bite force to crush skulls.

Or C. Someone deliberately rewound the head springlocks (at the least) so it would have the bite force to crush skulls. (Though this is unlikely, as the suit probably wouldn't be able to perform in suit mode without a wearer)

While I am unsure of the motives to do so, (As the Fnaf timeline is a mess) I believe that the culprit was likely Afton, as he would have been one of the only ones at the time who knew how to work the springlock suits (Being one of the two designers).

I say Afton, because depending on where the events of Fnaf 4 take place, he could have multiple reasons.

He could have wanted to kill a child using it, or it could be a sort of test run for the funtimes, to see how effective murder via animatronic was.

The above is all speculation however, and is not based in facts. These are merely my musings and hold no merit to the theory. As of now, there is no substantial evidence to confirm or deny Afton's involvement in the bite.

Overall, the bite of 83 could not be caused by an accidental springlock failure, meaning either Afton and Emily were really stupid when designing the suits, or someone tampered with the Fredbear suit to make it deadly.

If I have missed any evidence, feel free to correct me!

Thank you for reading this theory, I hope you have a wonderful day.

#fnaf #fnaf theory #the bite of 83 #springlock #springlock suit #fnaf crying child #this is my first time posting a theory like this #so i hope it's coherent #but anyways #have a nice day!