Thanks for your comments, and I could not agree more. I think the only solid proofs of anything are probably in mathematics. You can also present all kinds of evidence for things, and people can ignore it or argue from an infinite number of directions. If we dig deeper into the psyche, we may find that each one of us creates our own reality such that "proving" something would really have no meaning.
I think that people on the board are here for different purposes. It is obvious that many enjoy expounding their knowledge, and others like to argue. But the reason I think Graham Hancock established it, was to expand our knowledge base into some areas that perhaps have not been explored. For this, one needs to keep an open mind. I find it interesting how people will come to conclusions so quickly, and then defend them to the death. I have tried to take the approach of just throwing out some possibilities for people to ponder. If they find it interesting, they can explore further, and maybe we can all learn something new. Paul
Elizabeth Newton wrote:
> Hi Paul
> Thanks for the interesting posts this month and your essay
> that made me stop and think for a moment.
> Here's another of your comments that made me stop and think
> for a moment; "It is interesting that so many focus on trying
> to prove or disprove that the image is of Christ."
> Personally, I take the view that proving or disproving,
> believing or disbelieving has no relevance to the fact of
> whether or not it is the image of Christ. As far as I'm
> concerned, if it is, it is; if it isn't, it isn't. Whether
> or not I believe it, or not, doesn't change what it is.
> To digress, much of the discussion on this board is concerned
> with proving or disproving something or other. Let me use
> the example of the purpose of the Great Pyramid [if the
> moderators can tolerate a slight deviation from topic?].
> The purpose for the construction of the Great Pyramid is not
> going to change, regardless of whether that purpose is proved
> or disproved, or whether anyone believes it if it is proved.
> For this reason, I tend to stay away from these
> proving/disproving debates; i.e. whether or not I accept the
> proof or disproof, isn't going to change what the purpose of
> the Great Pyramid actually was, nor whether the shroud or
> Turin is or isn't the burial cloth of Jesus.
> Any ideas on this approach to these debates?
> Kind regards