Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It did not take me long at all to find Fred Woodworth because I found the other article first which linked me to Woodworth.
I did know Woodworth was an anarchist because it told me in the article right before the link.
Wow. You list as your sole piece of "evidence" the single page of a guy who has spent his life making insane ramblings like
"It seems like such a terrible shame that innocent civilians have to get hurt in wars, otherwise combat would be such a wonderfully healthy way to rid the human race of unneeded trash."-Fred Woodworth
And still say, OK, he's the guy who's opinion I'll trust and I don't need to see if MAYBE there is even one more person out there to say something similar? How do you feel about the fact that a panel of independent experts did not come to the same conclusion?
We can both watch a football game and agree that the same team won, but if you say the score was 21 to 4.73QRT, I can still say you are wrong in your statement
No wonder Rush has a following, that is really said.
Wow. You list as your sole piece of "evidence" the single page of a guy who has spent his life making insane ramblings like
"It seems like such a terrible shame that innocent civilians have to get hurt in wars, otherwise combat would be such a wonderfully healthy way to rid the human race of unneeded trash."-Fred Woodworth
And still say, OK, he's the guy who's opinion I'll trust and I don't need to see if MAYBE there is even one more person out there to say something similar? How do you feel about the fact that a panel of independent experts did not come to the same conclusion?
We can both watch a football game and agree that the same team won, but if you say the score was 21 to 4.73QRT, I can still say you are wrong in your statement
No wonder Rush has a following, that is really said.
You pull one line out of my post but don't aswer anything else in my post?
Do you not have any answers for what I asked?
Even in what you edited from my post I state " I found the other article first which linked me to Woodworth.".
Did you not bother to read the other article that was linked right above Woodworths? I think not since you say it is my sole piece of "evidence".
I never claimed this to be "evidence" as you call it. It is opinions by others who have more experience on the subject than you or I. There are many, many more but I didn't think we needed 20 links reiterateing that even though it could not be proved conclusively, the concensus by experts is that the documents were faked.
But you go ahead and throw out more quotes that are completely irrelevant to divert the attention away.
You pull one line out of my post but don't aswer anything else in my post?
Do you not have any answers for what I asked?
Even in what you edited from my post I state " I found the other article first which linked me to Woodworth.".
Did you not bother to read the other article that was linked right above Woodworths? I think not since you say it is my sole piece of "evidence".
I never claimed this to be "evidence" as you call it. It is opinions by others who have more experience on the subject than you or I. There are many, many more but I didn't think we needed 20 links reiterating that even though it could not be proved conclusively, the consensus by experts is that the documents were faked.
But you go ahead and throw out more quotes that are completely irrelevant to divert the attention away.
Did listening to Rush Limbaugh (who gallantly calls real troops 'phony') teach you to ignore the difference between primary and secondary sources, or did you get that on your own?
You posted two links, with the first being based on the second... 1 source. If I quote my own posts 20 times, that doesn't give me 20 sources. Also, if you had twenty links to choose from, why did you feel that the one from the guy who has made his living desiring chaos and disorder and saying that our soldiers are "unneeded trash"(as well as authoring books in favor of Anarchy and Atheism) was the best one to go with? If you ask me, that is only one notch above citing the excrement finger-paintings from the crazy homeless guy on the corner as evidence of your point.
PS, read my other posts (not just the ones quoting you). You might find that I have already answered your other questions.
No test was proposed.
<RedNC>: Do you also believe in Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy?
<Saganista>: I believe in standards. In its attacks on Dan Rather (principally brought because of his visibility), the right has failed to meet the standards that it accuses Rather of not meeting. Why would anyone find such argumentation persuasive?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
As you previously stated since they are not originals( “The Panel reaches no definitive conclusion as to whether the Killian documents are authentic. Given that the Killian documents are copies and not originals”) they can’t be verified as authentic.
I think you meant as I quoted. The statement itself is from the CBS Panel and was posted to provide context to a claim that it seemed pretty clear that the Panel thought the documents were fake. By the way, when they refer to originals and copies here, they are referring to the degredation that occurs between an original fed into a copy machine and the copy that comes out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
Lets hope that no one ever needs those documents you referred to as evidence, as they won’t meet the “standards test”.
They would qualify as authentic according to the National Archives and Records Administration, the authority under which the bulk of this digitizing was carried out. Even if you were to print out a document from 1973 in MS Word...
Did listening to Rush Limbaugh (who gallantly calls real troops 'phony') teach you to ignore the difference between primary and secondary sources, or did you get that on your own?
The phony soldier you are referencing never finished boot camp. I believe in order to rise to the level of “Real Troups” you have to first finish boot camp.
Did listening to Rush Limbaugh (who gallantly calls real troops 'phony') teach you to ignore the difference between primary and secondary sources, or did you get that on your own?
You posted two links, with the first being based on the second... 1 source. If I quote my own posts 20 times, that doesn't give me 20 sources. Also, if you had twenty links to choose from, why did you feel that the one from the guy who has made his living desiring chaos and disorder and saying that our soldiers are "unneeded trash"(as well as authoring books in favor of Anarchy and Atheism) was the best one to go with? If you ask me, that is only one notch above citing the excrement finger-paintings from the crazy homeless guy on the corner as evidence of your point.
PS, read my other posts (not just the ones quoting you). You might find that I have already answered your other questions.
If you read the first link you would have seen that he rendered his opinion and then also asked the opinion of another person.
Neither was based on the other .
The reason I picked the one opinion, I chose it because he seemed knowledgeable and had a persuasive agruement on the subject we were discussing. That subject being the document.
I was not interested in his political beliefs only his knowledge in regards to typewriters.
I will state again, if a doctor tells you you have a mole and it needs to be removed, do you question his medical opinion due to his political party affiliation. I would think not. Yet you question someones judgement on typewriters, fonts and documents based upon their political slant and religious persuasion.
I did read your other posts and it seems as if you agree the documents are probably fake but since your political ideologies clash with mine you instinctively want to argue the other side.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
