One thing i find odd part two.

[Annie]

(I am not impugning Phil's character, his honesty, or questioning his right to present an argument or opinion.  I am pointing out that Phil's claim is based on an illogical and false argument and he has thus drawn the wrong conclusion.)

It is sad you would even have to put this disclaimer on your post. It is ridiculous how the facts and reality get pushed around here and probably confuses a lot of innocent readers because a few individuals take things personally when it is only their position being criticized.

[Louis_Charles]

There seems to be a lot of confusion as to what's the difference between a personal belief (opinion) and a demonstrable fact. And while it is certainly true that everyone is "entitled" to her opinion, it is also certainly true that mutually exclusive "opinions" that deal with facts can only exist in the following senses:

(1) one of them is right and one of them is wrong. In which case, you can cling to your incorrect opinion, but you are wrong. Is there a point to that which I am missing?

(2) both opinions are wrong. Possible, but of course if you do not allow that argumentation --- or discussion, call it what you will --- can change your mind, then you are asserting your right to be wrong. Is there a point to that which I am missing?

One can be unhappy with the language used in the correction, but one should not dismiss the idea that correction is possible.

[lexi4]

Annie,
Please, please don't tell me the world is round! Next you will expect me to believe that a man really landed on the moon and that it isn't cheese. That would be more than I could baar. 

Well, take heart, there are conspiracy theories that it was only an act put on in a Hollywood studio to trick the Russians

I'm sure there must be a 'moon is made of green cheese' society somewhere!
Whew! At least you didn't tell me the moon wasn't made of cheese. 

I'm sure there must be a "moon is made of green cheese" society somewhere!

And don't forget that advanced alien society that lives on the dark side of the moon!

LOL Annie! I don't care if an advanced alien society lives there as long as the don't eat the cheese! 

[Annie]

LOL Annie! I don't care if an advanced alien society lives there as long as the don't eat the cheese! 

Surely if they are advanced enough to send all those UFO's here, they should be intelligent enough to know they'd be eating themselves out of house and home!

One good thing about a thread called 'one thing I find odd'- it's really hard to go OT because technically a heck of a lot can be odd!

[lexi4]

LOL Annie! I don't care if an advanced alien society lives there as long as the don't eat the cheese! 

Surely if they are advanced enough to send all those UFO's here, they should be intelligent enough to know they'd be eating themselves out of house and home!

LOL  That was a good one!

One good thing about a thread called 'one thing I find odd'- it's really hard to go OT because technically a heck of a lot can be odd!

True enough. 

[AGRBear]

I apologize to all of you that Annie is constantly repeating her unfounded attacks on Bear and then I have to reply and so we go around and around. BORING.

Annie wrote in part:

Bear, if you really don't believe AA was AN, WHY do you ENDLESSLY try so hard to prove she was any way you can? ALL of your posts are PRO AA!! I have said this before, if you were even partially unbiased and tried to give info on BOTH sides, I would believe you were really seeking the 'truth' but since you are always on the side of the claimant, I can't believe you. Actions speak louder than words!

Annie obviously did NOT  understand my statement:

AGRBear's quote:

I do not believe AA was GD Anastasia.

If she cannot understand these simple words then how can I trust her with other facts since she can't grasp the meaning of my  simple sentence.  Obviously,  I can't,  so,  it is very logical to me to ask for her sources so I can read them and make my own opinion. 

When I do ask Annie for sources,  she refuses.  I can only assume her reason is because she doesn't have a source or doesn't want me or others to find it and discover she's voice only half  the truth which is the part that aids her position.  I doubt it's because she lazy.   Once when she said she didn't have a book,  some of us offered to find her sources if  she'd  give us the name of the book and then we'd find the page and quote it for her to help prove her facts,  she  didn't, still doesn't, so we know that excuse doesn't work anymore.

I ask other people for sources, too,  so,  I'm not just asking Annie.

Because I do ask for sources,  it may appear to Annie  and others that I'm pro-AA, but I am not pro-AA, therefore  you've misunderstood.  My reason is quite simpe: As I have said many times,  those of us who believe AA was not GD Anastasia do not need half truths or lies to prove our position.

Accurate opinions are based on accurate facts.

AGRBear

[Annie]

Annie obviously did NOT  understand my statement:

AGRBear's quote:
I do not believe AA was GD Anastasia.

Bear, you have yet to explain why ALL of your posts are pro AA. If I claimed to believe in AA, yet all of my posts were against her, would you believe me? You have proven yourself over and over again to be on the side of the claimants, so it means NOTHING that you say you do not believe them. You certainly do a great impression of believing in them, much better than AA s portrayal of AN! You, bear, have been the queen of wild theories, intestine switch, tunnels under Ekaterinburg, etc., until FA finally put a stop to the spreading of such blatant misinformation. WHY do you believe such things, or even consider them, if you do not believe AA to be AN?

When I do ask Annie for sources,  she refuses.  I can only assume her reason is because she doesn't have a source or doesn't want me or others to find it and discover she's voice only half  the truth which is the part that aids her position.

We have been through all this before. I HAVE actually posted sources before, and you ignore them, or others, like MG, discount them and criticize the writer (like calling Dehn, Buxhoevedon and AV "fawning women") or picking on John Godl, yet if I disagree with an author YOU like, you have a fit.

Other times I cannot quote a page number because I do not have the book with me. I have read a LOT on this subject over the last 32 years, and there is a lot stored in my memory banks, but I cannot possibly place it all to the book or article it came from. Some of the books I read when I was young are out of print, not in libraries anymore, and I do not even remember the names of them, but I do remember reading certain details. What I bring up is a wide variety of stuff I recall, and I would rather see that than a hundred and ten quotes from "File on the Tsar" and "Riddle of Anastasia" we have all seen hundreds of times. Again, as others here have said, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN QUOTE A PAGE NUMBER DOES NOT MAKE IT A FACT!!!!! and by the same token, just because you  cannot off the top of your head doe not make it wrong. You bear somehow feel that because you can put up a page number you are always right, but you are not, and neither is all the stuff you quote!!

Accurate opinions are based on accurate facts.

AGRBear

You mean like believing AA was not AN because her DNA does not match the royals but does match the family of FS? You seem to keep forgetting and disregarding that fact. And that IS a fact.

[LisaDavidson]

Annie and AGR Bear - you need to de-personalize your disagreements. It's fine to ask for sources or disagree with another person's reasoning - but not okay to make things into a verbal wrestling match.

[Tania]

I am quite appreciative and cognizant of the entirety of efforts Bear goes through in offering facts, and to going in depth to bring up past facts on issues to date on this thread and others. I don't think that we are deficet in the receivership of facts past, and presently to date.

Lisa has said it is fine to offer sources, and it seems to date, for a long time, it is and continully offered only from Bear. I would like to see actual facts from Annie as well instead of endless blame against others for not producing what she wants, personally. It is getting very stale to read the tireless rheortic of attacking words, bantared aganst another without that person themselves being forthwith and producing an up to date actual balance of what they think, from actual facts to share with the forum. All readers are asking for I think is an actual balance to weight it against in terms of actual facts already offered from a major fact source. From Bear's, and others of whom post to and on this particular issue, then we all may gain our own conclusions from the balance of what is offered.
This is all that we as readers need, but not be subjected to this victrolic exasperation of volley of words that are repeated over and over like a taped monologue, if not robotic. With less excuses and more actual quoted facts, you will offer readers all that needs to be as bottom line. At present these endless words really only turn me off, and for most readers I would imagine it does the same.

Real sources from reliable writers, are for the most part imho, much more credible than just general lol, depersonalized...? ...attacks against posters...  I vote for offering reliable sources.

Tatiana+

[AGRBear]

Annie obviously did NOT  understand my statement:

AGRBear's quote:
I do not believe AA was GD Anastasia.

Bear, you have yet to explain why ALL of your posts are pro AA. If I claimed to believe in AA, yet all of my posts were against her, would you believe me? You have proven yourself over and over again to be on the side of the claimants, so it means NOTHING that you say you do not believe them. You certainly do a great impression of believing in them, much better than AA s portrayal of AN! You, bear, have been the queen of wild theories, intestine switch, tunnels under Ekaterinburg, etc., until FA finally put a stop to the spreading of such blatant misinformation. WHY do you believe such things, or even consider them, if you do not believe AA to be AN?

When I do ask Annie for sources,  she refuses.  I can only assume her reason is because she doesn't have a source or doesn't want me or others to find it and discover she's voice only half  the truth which is the part that aids her position.

We have been through all this before. I HAVE actually posted sources before, and you ignore them, or others, like MG, discount them and criticize the writer (like calling Dehn, Buxhoevedon and AV "fawning women") or picking on John Godl, yet if I disagree with an author YOU like, you have a fit.

Other times I cannot quote a page number because I do not have the book with me. I have read a LOT on this subject over the last 32 years, and there is a lot stored in my memory banks, but I cannot possibly place it all to the book or article it came from. Some of the books I read when I was young are out of print, not in libraries anymore, and I do not even remember the names of them, but I do remember reading certain details. What I bring up is a wide variety of stuff I recall, and I would rather see that than a hundred and ten quotes from "File on the Tsar" and "Riddle of Anastasia" we have all seen hundreds of times. Again, as others here have said, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN QUOTE A PAGE NUMBER DOES NOT MAKE IT A FACT!!!!! and by the same token, just because you  cannot off the top of your head doe not make it wrong. You bear somehow feel that because you can put up a page number you are always right, but you are not, and neither is all the stuff you quote!!

Accurate opinions are based on accurate facts.

AGRBear

You mean like believing AA was not AN because her DNA does not match the royals but does match the family of FS? You seem to keep forgetting and disregarding that fact. And that IS a fact.

Lisa,

It is difficult not to be personal due  another attack but I asure you that even though I will get off the merry go 'round first  by  ignoring this post  it will not be the last one  I shall recieve because I will, again, ask  for a source or I will state a source in rebuttal  if I think facts have been construed on any subject.  And,  if I'm proven wrong,  I'm the first to admit it and will thank you for pointing me in the direction of truth. 

Accurate opinions are based on accurate facts.

AGRBear

[Annie]

I am not even going to bother to answer any more posts by bear or Tania.

[LisaDavidson]

I think it's time to shut this topic down. Discussion? This should not be a part of the Forum where anyone is attacked, and unfortunately, it seems that it is.

[lexi4]

I think it's time to shut this topic down. Discussion? This should not be a part of the Forum where anyone is attacked, and unfortunately, it seems that it is.

I think the topic is lost.

[Annie]

I think it's time to shut this topic down. Discussion? This should not be a part of the Forum where anyone is attacked, and unfortunately, it seems that it is.

I think the topic is lost.

Was there ever a topic to begin with?

[Eddie_uk]

Sorry - it was supposed to be a continuation of part 1. It was just the other was so long and taking ages to load!!