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).
Origyptian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Warwick Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Origyptian Wrote:
> >
> > > My point is that anyone can make any claim
> they
> > > want about their own qualifications and it's
> > > meaningless on a board like this unless such
> > > claims can be definitively corroborated.
> >
> >
> > So what you are saying is that the only
> > substantive posts are those that can be
> > qualified.
>
> Verified, not qualified.
> Not sure what you mean by "qualified".
an educated opinion can be qualified
only a fact can be verified
>
> And I was specifically referring to claims about a
> person's qualifications.
so am I.
Let me offer an example
I accept many of the conclusions that Robert Bauval has drawn as being plausible , because his opinions are based on his education, experience , and excellent research methodology.
I accept none of the conclusions that Van Daniken has drawn as being remotely possible, because his opinions are based on his ignorance, fantasies, and PT Barnum presentation.
I'll leave the many shades of grey in between to your imagination
Warwick
-------------------------------------------------------
> Warwick Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Origyptian Wrote:
> >
> > > My point is that anyone can make any claim
> they
> > > want about their own qualifications and it's
> > > meaningless on a board like this unless such
> > > claims can be definitively corroborated.
> >
> >
> > So what you are saying is that the only
> > substantive posts are those that can be
> > qualified.
>
> Verified, not qualified.
> Not sure what you mean by "qualified".
an educated opinion can be qualified
only a fact can be verified
>
> And I was specifically referring to claims about a
> person's qualifications.
so am I.
Let me offer an example
I accept many of the conclusions that Robert Bauval has drawn as being plausible , because his opinions are based on his education, experience , and excellent research methodology.
I accept none of the conclusions that Van Daniken has drawn as being remotely possible, because his opinions are based on his ignorance, fantasies, and PT Barnum presentation.
I'll leave the many shades of grey in between to your imagination
Warwick
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.