Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).
Warwick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm still waiting to hear how Vyse got into the
> Boat Pit.
>
> apparently the easiest questions ARE the hardest
> to answer. Or, is that easiest to ignore?
>
> Warwick
Good one. Completely forgot about pursuing that. Why did I forget? Because of the nature of inserting tangent fluffery.
If I may, let's ponder why we ask questions of these good citizens.
We insert questions in order to invoke their intuition, i.e. to become aware of their mistake through their own volition. Sort of like leaving a crumb so they can see for themselves what their error is. It is a Platonic teaching tool. It's when they deflect or don't comprehend we have to explain the obvious answer. In this example you've revived it is: Vyse could not have. Ergo, rendering the relieving chamber forgery argument kaput. Their minds pick up on this revelation before posting a response, and immediately go into defense mode. The result is a forced response - no matter how absurd - just as long as they don't give in to being wrong. I am no doubt preaching to the choir. :)
Anyhoo ...
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm still waiting to hear how Vyse got into the
> Boat Pit.
>
> apparently the easiest questions ARE the hardest
> to answer. Or, is that easiest to ignore?
>
> Warwick
Good one. Completely forgot about pursuing that. Why did I forget? Because of the nature of inserting tangent fluffery.
If I may, let's ponder why we ask questions of these good citizens.
We insert questions in order to invoke their intuition, i.e. to become aware of their mistake through their own volition. Sort of like leaving a crumb so they can see for themselves what their error is. It is a Platonic teaching tool. It's when they deflect or don't comprehend we have to explain the obvious answer. In this example you've revived it is: Vyse could not have. Ergo, rendering the relieving chamber forgery argument kaput. Their minds pick up on this revelation before posting a response, and immediately go into defense mode. The result is a forced response - no matter how absurd - just as long as they don't give in to being wrong. I am no doubt preaching to the choir. :)
Anyhoo ...