What does Sun Apr6 32AD mean? (3/3)
Brian Malcolm
You want to calim a KO based on a trival mistake, which was not even
Anderson's but mine? That is absurd. What my opinion is doesn't
matter. What Anderson thinks is all that matters. And the minor mistake
that I made did nothing at all to undermine the theoy upon which
Anderson's book is based.
POOBAH
You are lying, Don, because I never claimed that the mistake was only yours.
I also claimed that Anderson erred. Stop misrepresenting my position, Don.
If you represent my position, why should anyone believe that you are
accurately representing Anderson's position, especially since you've now
publicly had to retract a position at least twice that I can remember? Who
do you think that people should think has a better understanding of
Anderson's text, you or me, and why?
Finally, I won't respond to anything else in this post until I've got a
clarification as to what your current position really is.
Farrell Till
TILL
I have also sent a posting requesting Keyes to state his position in a
precisely worded proposition like those that debaters read and define at the
beginning of the affirmant's first speech. This has become essential,
because it is no longer possible to know what Keyes believes, since he
changes his position to something else each time he is cornered. At first,
there were exactly 173,880 days between Anderson's two dates. Then when it
was shown conclusively that there were actually 173,883 days between the two
dates, Keyes switched horses in midstream and claimed that no one had ever
denied that there were 173,883 days between the two dates but that
Anderson's "intention" was to "match the solar year," and so when the days
are counted with the intention of counting only those that "match the solar
seasons," the 173,883 days become 173,880 days. Keyes also began by saying
that Anderson's dates were Julian March 14, 445 BC, and Julian April 3, AD
32, and that these dates cannot be changed. When he finally had to admit
that there were really 173,883 days between the two dates, he himself
changed the end date to April 3, AD 32, and argued that this was what
Anderson had really meant even though Anderson himself had never used April
3rd. Then when Brian Malcolm showed that Anderson clearly meant that the
end date was a Sunday and that that Sunday had to be April 6, Keyes admitted
that Malcolm's conclusions were right, and then what? Well, Keyes moved the
goal posts again and began to talk about the date of March 14, 445 BC,
possibly not being the real beginning date.
So it is past time for Keyes to state his position in the form of a
precisely worded proposition.
RESOLVED: .........................
Fill in the blank, Keyes. Exactly what is it that you are resolved to defend?
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jft...@midwest.net