User blog comment:Legionwrex/Why Destroy is the worst ending (besides refusal)./@comment-4237253-20120707170543/@comment-899316-20120708221221

Rannoch is only one anomaly. As far as we know, this is the only time in the millions of years society has existed that peace has been achieved between synthetics and organics. So, as far as we know, 99.999% of the time, the Catalyst's theory will be correct. Maybe there's that 0.001% of the time where peace shows up, but that's negligible.

Also, for every example of peace we have in this cycle, there's a counterexample. Peace on Rannoch and EDI are examples of peace, but what that crazy AI who was stealing credits on the Citadel in the first game? Or the Overlord hybrid AI that planned on unleashing a technological apocalypse on the galaxy? And who could forget the Hannibal-class VI that massacred those soldiers on the Moon? Oh, and did I mention the Hahne-Kedar VI virus from ME2 that led to all of those crazy mech massacres?

As for Shepard's survival, that does not really prove the theory of inevitable syntho-organic war false. It proves the Catalyst to be fallible, something it actually admits to in the Extended Cut. Being wrong about one thing, however, does not make it wrong about everything else.

Being able to make a decision that does not solve the problem of syntho-organic war also does not disprove its existence. That simply means that the problem, if it exists, isn't solved. Again, not that it doesn't exist.

In the end, we can neither prove, nor disprove the Catalyst's theory until the devs give us something more concrete. I think the Catalyst was handled quite poorly, actually, because they never gave us any real indicator of the truth or falsehood of his statements. I personally think he is probably correct, given the indication that every cycle before ours has had a crazy war against synthetics, much like our cycle's war against the geth. If overwhelming evidence to the contrary is presented, I will of course admit to my mistake in judgement. For now, however, there is just as much evidence on one side as the other.