Author Topic: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem  (Read 79658 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #60 on: April 20, 2005, 11:58:19 AM »
Quote
The differences do not just melt away because of the DNA, they remain.    


Michael, I don't think you understood my point, I probably wasn't that clear. I am not arguing that the reported differences exist. My point is, that these differences can be explained away reasonably, now that the DNA showed us what the real answer is. This is a subtle concept, but pretty understandable.

DNA gave us the answer - and while other things may appear to exist that contradict this answer, they can be explained away without negating the DNA results. While the DNA results cannot be explained away in order to negate these other things. That's all.

But when someone tries to provide possible explanations for these things (explanations that are pretty reasonable and not "out there" at all), this person is usually accused of having an agenda.

Quote
 
My question for you is, why do you continue to discuss it, if the DNA answers all your questions??  

I just gave my answer on the other thread where you also posed this question...

Mgmstl

  • Guest
ARe: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #61 on: April 20, 2005, 12:07:42 PM »
Annie, the differences do melt away, IN YOUR OPINION.
However, in my opinion THEY DO NOT.  So in the future please refrain from telling me what I can and cannot think or believe.  Or has Bush & the "christian right" taken total control within the last few minutes. :o :o

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #62 on: April 20, 2005, 12:09:20 PM »
I see the merry-go-'round is still here.

Michael G.,  you've been so nice to let me have the Black Horse who reminds me of Black Beauty.

After this,  I think I'd like to get off for awhile, too.

I don't think it is the circles we're taking these days but maybe it's being force feed all this mtDNA that's making my berries and honey flip flop in my tummy.

Yes, I've told them over and over, just like you and others have, that they don't need to feed mtDNA to me anymore but they do NOT seem to understand.  I wonder if this is a paradox and a problem as well.


The Hokey AGRBear

PS:
Heads who can't accept the possibility they may not know everything >><<Wall of truth

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline Vera_Figner

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 110
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #63 on: April 20, 2005, 12:58:35 PM »
Quote
Yes Vera you are exactly right, echos Annie from the background....

Annie shoe size is an issue.

The earring are not an issue.  Just a mere footnote.

My issues are with language, culture, PHYSICAL differences.


Annie who could keep from ignoring you, you are constantly like a spoiled unwanted child screaming the loudest from a group of screaming children.  So no one is ignoring you, it's just that some of us don't agree with you.  

Vera I have a suprise for you,  my issue is NOT with the DNA or it's results.  So please if you want to discuss DNA go to the DNA thread.....



No you don't Michael. You have contradicted yourself on this issue several times in just the past 24 hours, and even more previously.  Shall I dredge them all up and post them here so you can explain how it is that you can support and question DNA results in the same instance?

This will be a magnificent feat. Won't you indulge us and explain what appears to be some sort of double-speak. Are you feeling a little bit Orwellian?

Now, as to language and culture. Are you an anthropologist or perhaps a linguist?  Wait. You work for PayLess shoes, is that it?

Either way, none of these matter whatsoever. At least to those who trouble themselves to learn just a little bit (that's all it takes for clarification) about DNA science.

Why do you avoid answering the question as to what you know about that subject?



Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4756
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: ARe: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a prob
« Reply #64 on: April 20, 2005, 12:59:51 PM »
Quote
Annie, the differences do melt away, IN YOUR OPINION.
However, in my opinion THEY DO NOT.  So in the future please refrain from telling me what I can and cannot think or believe.  Or has Bush & the "christian right" taken total control within the last few minutes. :o :o


[glb]BUT HISTORICAL AND SCIENTIFIC FACT ARE NOT OPINION!!!!![/glb]






There is an answer to this! As I said before, it's an opinion what your favorite color is and what pizza you prefer and no one can challenge that. But this is not like that! There is proof, and your fantasy 'opinion' does not change the FACTS!!!!





Offline Vera_Figner

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 110
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #65 on: April 20, 2005, 01:00:10 PM »
Quote
Michael, I think that they are absolultely right. If you accept DNA evidence for what it is, all other evidence, which is not definitive in any case, becomes irrellevant. Since various testimonies about all the things you mentioned were always contradictory to each other, we had no way of knowing which was correct. But DNA came along and put a rest to that. DNA evidence showed, unbiasely, where the answer lies.
For anyone who understands DNA and accepts it, that should pretty much be the end of it, unless out of curiousity you just want to find exaplanations for all the other evidence that contradicts it (but not negates it). And obviously there are explanations to all this other stuff, we just don't know what they are. But that doesn't mean that it can effectively contadict the DNA evidence, it can't. So someone continues doubting the answer that DNA gave us by bringing other evidence in, such as shoes, teeth and language abilities, it shows that this someone does not fully accept the DNA evidence. Anyone who fully understands what the DNA evidence means would see the absurdity of comparing DNA to shoes, teeth, bunions, language abilities, etc.

What I just said is probably going to make you angry and you may also accuse me of having personal agenda in this, but I assure you, the only personal agenda I have is to try to get across to the readers accurate information about what these DNA results actually mean, in comparison to the other evidence as well.  
If you accept DNA, it means you now have your answer  within 0.00025%, regardless of all the other, much less compelling, evidence. If you accept the other evidence, that means you are rejecting DNA results, which means you don't trust them for whatever reason. You can't accept the DNA results and also accept the other evidence like shoes, birth certificates, languages, etc. If you accept one then that means you reject the other, there is nothing in between...

DNA evidence tells us that although all these other claims exist about various contracdictory evidence, there are other possible explanations for the other evidence such as shoes and teeth, which may be that it was a mistaken testimony, lies, mix ups, whatever, but the explanations would be there. In contrast, there is no other possible explanation for what the DNA results showed us, none at all, unless you want to believe conspiracies, which of course you are welcome to, but you stated numerous times that you don't.

You should decide if you actually do believe DNA or you don't, and argue your points using other evidence based on that, but you really can't have it both ways... you can't say that you believe the DNA but that you believe the other evidence just as much.
 



Helen, brilliant! And worth posting twice!

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4756
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #66 on: April 20, 2005, 01:02:58 PM »
I have one more thing to say before I get off for now. My son's friend is writing a research paper on the Romanovs, and he told her it might be interesting to include the AA story. She refused, saying that AA was FS, everyone knows that now, it's a proven (scientific and historical) fact, and it's so stupid it's not even worth bringing it up anymore as no rational person with a brain in their head would even have a doubt anymore. (her words!)

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #67 on: April 20, 2005, 01:17:18 PM »
Annie, you can post all of the BS that you want, but you and your mignion Vera, cannot and will not change my mind.  

Vera I have never altered or changed or waivered in what I have said from day one.  So may I suggest you stick your nose just a bit further up Annie's derriere,
along with your opinion.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Mgmstl »

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #68 on: April 20, 2005, 01:21:30 PM »
Oh & Vera, I have never CLAIMED to be an anthropologist nor a dna expert or scientist of any kind,
so tell me what is your background that makes you so mighty and far above the rest of us???  

What exactly is your background Vera?

Offline Vera_Figner

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 110
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #69 on: April 20, 2005, 01:22:57 PM »
Quote
Annie, you can post all of the BS that you want, but you and you mignion Vera, cannot and will not change my mind.  

Vera I have never altered or changed or waivered in what I have said from day one.  So may I suggest you stick your nose just a bit further up Annie's derriere,
along with your opinion.


Now Michael, how can you say that when YOUR head is entirely in your very OWN derriere!
That's minion, btw, and I do not know Annie so cannot be her minion.
You still avoid the obvious don't you, all the while accusing others of BS and head placement! You do not know how to successfully argue a point, and refuse to explain how it is you can believe DNA results, and at the same time...not!  How vapid!

Ok, I don't have time today to dredge up all the times you contradicted yourself (you're so unconscious about it, it's hilarious!) so hopefully you won't go deleting your pearls of wisdom in the meantime, because I will copy and paste every one I find into a new post to prove my point! I will watch and see if your posts increase or decline! What fun!


Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #70 on: April 20, 2005, 01:23:37 PM »
Annie I could care less what research paper your son's friend is writing.  I just hope that he/she/it doesn't use you to gather FACTS.....  Have a nice day ;D

Offline Vera_Figner

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 110
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #71 on: April 20, 2005, 01:29:23 PM »
Quote
Oh & Vera, I have never CLAIMED to be an anthropologist nor a dna expert or scientist of any kind,
so tell me what is your background that makes you so mighty and far above the rest of us???  

What exactly is your background Vera?


My background is irrelevant as I do not dispute the DNA tests whatsoever and neither do I contradict myself with every breath.

However, I have a B.S. in biology, B.A. in history, with minors in various subjects including Russian studies, anthropology, and I'm still studying most of the above.

The point is, EVERYTHING you need to know about DNA as far as interpreting and understanding this case can be had very easily in Biol 101 OR on one's own, even online, if one bothers to make such discoveries before talking out of both sides of the mouth.

I find it very interesting that you believe it is fine to contradict yourself, but when OTHERS contradict you, well, that's just not on, is it?  No one can have a reasonable discussion with someone possessing that mindset.  

Now, will you finally answer the question and explain how it is you understand DNA and can still have pertinent (non-fantasy land) questions about this case?

How pathetic! You are asked repeatedly, provided with examples of where you contradicted yourself, but rather than having the intestinal fortitude to defend your position, you go on the attack, demanding others present their credentials.

I obliged. Are you able to do the same?

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #72 on: April 20, 2005, 01:31:24 PM »
Vera, as I said before I have not changed my mind or my statement on DNA.

What I have said is that I will continue to research and discuss the differences, and hopefully come to a conclusion on my own without interference from yourself or Annie.

FIND where I have contradicted myself on what I have stated... You will have a problem there Vera.  I have never stated that I did believe AA was FS or that  after research I didn't believe the DNA.

Go ahead and waste your time Vera.....you aren't wasting ANYMORE of mine.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Mgmstl »

Offline Vera_Figner

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 110
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #73 on: April 20, 2005, 01:33:18 PM »
Answer the question put to you Michael.

Or can't you?

If you won't, then I think we all have your answer.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: the 'mundane' idea - a paradox and a problem
« Reply #74 on: April 20, 2005, 01:37:48 PM »
Quote
...[in part]...
Helen again, & I politely & respectfully state to you, that
the DNA is not the issue.  

Believing the DNA is not the issue.

What remains to be discussed and researched and analyzed are the differences.   Of course we could just leave them to another generation to ferret out, and
argue over.   The differences do not just melt away because of the DNA, they remain.    

...


How many of these post would you like me to find and post here to prove Michael has been consistant in trying to talk about the "differences"?

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152