Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
David,
After reading through the latest round of messages, it seems to me that you are most often defending Betty and knocking those who present differing viewpoints. You appear to harp on those who won't give Betty the credit you feel she deserves, yet you discard others views as reasonable guesses. Why aren't those opposing Betty given the same credit (as you seem to always give Betty) when they present facts, theories, evidence, etc (whatever you'd like to call it -- I don't want to tie myself down to a single word for fear that you might break out the dictionary again)?
Understand that I am not claiming that you 'always' explain away the views of those opposing Betty, but that I see it more often than you acknowledge their points as valid. You continually ask others to give Betty some credit for views that may or may not hold some weight, yet I don't see you giving others the same credit. Colleen, in my opinion, had made some valid points. Not quoting, but you took what she said and basically dispelled it as a guess that might be true, but might not. In fact, you spoke the truth -- keeping the same train of thought, shouldn't that same attitude be taken when you speak of Betty's theories? Unless of course, you are a believer in her theories and are no longer being objective towards those opposing Betty's claims.
Just as an informative question, what is your role in this whole thing? I am unaware of your background, but it seems to me like you don't have much to add to this debate, other than defending Betty. Can't the 'truth' speak for itself?
Regards,
Morgan H Courtney
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/james/messages/6185.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|