On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 15:17:46 -0400 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Blainer wrote:
> > Well, I am assuming you are neither a liar, or an
> > adulterer or a murderer or a pimp (whoremonger).
>
> I hope you understand that a pimp and a whoremonger are two
> different
> things.
Blainer) Websters Dictionary defines whoremonger as follows:
Whoremonger: 1) a whoremaster 2) a lecher
> Whoremaster: One who keeps or procure whores for others; a pimp; a
procurer
> Blainer wrote:
> > Just keep in mind that as with almost all that is written
> > on tt, it is conjecture.
>
> Most of what I write is not conjecture. Maybe that is why we have
> some
> trouble between us. If you are writing conjecture, and you assume
> that
> others here do so also, then we are not going to communicate very
> well.
>
> based upon
> guesswork or inconclusive evidence, but only upon what makes sense
> from the
> available evidence.
Blainer) Please keep in mind that what makes sense to your biases, does
not always make sense to me.
If I'm not sure about something, I will tell
> you that
> I'm not sure. If I make a conclusion, then there are reasons,
> evidence,
> backing up my conclusions.
Blainer) A LOT of your conclusions are actually your biases speaking.
(:>) What you assert is often just that--an assertion. You need to
discriminate between what is "proof" and what is merely supporting
evidence for what you are asserting. Your assertion that JS married a 3
yr. old is a typical example. After examining your evidence, I could not
see that it was conclusive. Again, it may have seemed to you to be
sufficient to draw the conclusions you drew, but I saw other possible
explanations, which I expressed. I still see no conclusive proof , even
though I have searched the church's records as much as time allowed. I
doubt anyone could have found anything I did not find, yet no proof was
ever forthcoming. If you have CONCLUSIVE proof, please present it. The
same with your assertion that JS joined a Protestant Church. It seems
there was actually more evidence that the minister of that church placed
his name on the records, then took them off to discredit him. He MAY
have requested his name on there, perhaps to please the Hale family, whom
he was trying to impress. BUt the proof is just not there, although your
biases are clearly there.
> TruthTalk is misnamed if most of what is written here is conjecture.
> Truth
> is not based upon guesswork.
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller.
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you
> may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
> http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you
> have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who
wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be
subscribed.
