Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [SCA-Archery] Gotcha!

Expand Messages
  • Ken and Jenn
    If gotcha means that you were able to get responses from people at the absurdity of your post then GOT I AM. Being unable to read between your lines reflects
    Message 1 of 2 , Dec 25 9:09 AM
      If gotcha means that you were able to get responses from people
      at the absurdity of your post then GOT I AM. Being unable to read
      between your lines reflects upon my ability to divine the "true"
      meaning of your message, or, your ability to convey it in a form
      that dolts like me can understand. If you want to convince/educate
      anyone look at the people who keep posting their circular arguments,
      fail to make their point, and then refuse back away leaving what
      is said to stand.

      In any discussions you can come to a point that is a belief of
      one person or another. Reaching that point of faith requires the
      discussions to end. No matter how hard you hit your debating opponent
      with your tome of knowledge, you will not force any more ideas into
      their heads.

      Seasons Greetings,
      Nicetas

      At 10:43 AM 12/25/00 -0600, you wrote:
      >Forester Nigel FitzMaurice (Mid) wrote, "That certainly doesn't provide any
      >sort of "proof" that I would recognize as definitive to the matter in
      >question." I reply, CORRECT! But this was posted in response to Michael the
      >Loud's (and others) statements about 'nobody has posted one credable source
      >proving that isn't not period.' I KNOW it is not proof. If I quoted a
      >thousand, or a hundred thousand documents that were written before 1600 that
      >mention archery, but failed to mention string-walking, it would still not be
      >"proof". That is the very reason I posted the four references. Just so we
      >who understand the impossibility of "proving" a negative could show WHY a
      >negative cannot be proven. And to provide those who claim that no one has
      >posted any evidence showing string-walking was not period something that has
      >been posted about (actually NOT about) the subject. The sources are
      >credible. Just not about this subject. Obviously, if they had mentioned the
      >subject, it would be evidence to show that it was in fact period. That is
      >the whole point. There will never be a reference that discusses the subject
      >from a period source that can be used to show it's non-existance.
      > Thanks, Kaz and Carolus, for understanding how tongue in cheek the
      >posting was. Now, lets drop the subject from the list, at least until
      >someone comes up with a 'cedible' citation showing it did exist. That's all
      >any of us have asked for. And that is the one thing that has not been
      >posted.
      >Evian Blackthorn
      >of THE WEB
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Get medieval at Mad Macsen's
      >http://www.MedievalMart.com/
      >
      >Sponsored by House Wyvern Hall, BBM, East Kingdom, SCA
      >[Email to SCA-Archery-unsubscribe@egroups.com to leave this list]
      >
      >
      >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.