- Joined
- Jan 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,634
NO I understand it is a big secret and if you gave up your source you would have to ( quote kill who ever you gave up your source to ) Your words jokenly said. Your post was refreshing in that instead of claiming the information was part of your vast research you finally at least gave some recognition to the real author of your vast store of knowledge.
I can understand there wishing to give up information without wanting credit or wishing to be known, that is there right a reporter often writes what he is told from a source however he is a reporter and does not create the illusion that he is an expert on the subject. That is why books have bibliographys in which credit is given to where the information comes from and also validates it. It is good that you have finally started to concede that your posts are not as implied the result of fervent research but rather just repeating what you were told and accept as true. Or simply verbatum copy of what has been written but never has a source of where ( what volume author ect ) that this information was gleaned from. Are those sources for those, spouted plagerized, verbatum, postings also a secret? I have said all along that it is great to have someone who is truly committed to this aspect of this subject. All I am asking for is a bit of sourcing for your statments so that perhapes we also can make some decisions of there credibility instead of simply your intractable opinion of there validity. If my audacity of questioning your unimpingable sources or simply wanting to validate them myself, rather that just accepting your Godlike wisdom seems difficult to understand then continue to pretend everything you say is the result of your own study and writings. I won't mind, any more than any other opinion that classifys itself as an opinion, instead of a fact which cannot be verified since it is a big secret. LT
I can understand there wishing to give up information without wanting credit or wishing to be known, that is there right a reporter often writes what he is told from a source however he is a reporter and does not create the illusion that he is an expert on the subject. That is why books have bibliographys in which credit is given to where the information comes from and also validates it. It is good that you have finally started to concede that your posts are not as implied the result of fervent research but rather just repeating what you were told and accept as true. Or simply verbatum copy of what has been written but never has a source of where ( what volume author ect ) that this information was gleaned from. Are those sources for those, spouted plagerized, verbatum, postings also a secret? I have said all along that it is great to have someone who is truly committed to this aspect of this subject. All I am asking for is a bit of sourcing for your statments so that perhapes we also can make some decisions of there credibility instead of simply your intractable opinion of there validity. If my audacity of questioning your unimpingable sources or simply wanting to validate them myself, rather that just accepting your Godlike wisdom seems difficult to understand then continue to pretend everything you say is the result of your own study and writings. I won't mind, any more than any other opinion that classifys itself as an opinion, instead of a fact which cannot be verified since it is a big secret. LT