The Diary — Old Hoax or New or Not a Hoax at All?​

[Darryl Kenyon]

Perhaps Mike Barrett just wanted to stare at the empty pages

[Iconoclast]

Hi Herlock
The obvious logical reason why Mike was looking for a diary from the period 1880-1890 with a minimum of 20 blank pages is to create a fake Victorian Diary as you say.
Cheers John

But is it the only explanation, Wheato? You are welcome to believe wholeheartedly in the one you like, the one that fits your narrative (however indolent that may be of you), but can you - in all honesty - say that it is the only option (as tyrants and the evangelical turn instinctively to)?

Just a wee warning, when someone tells you a belief or a theory is 'nonsensical', you can absolutely rest assured they don't want you considering it. When someone tells you one theory amongst many is the only possible answer to a question, you can rest assured that they need you to believe that for their own premise to be maintained.

You are welcome to continue to assume that what you think is obvious and logical is necessarily the answer, but you may be wrong. You may feel that the small issue of Barrett seeking an 1889 or 1890 diary and then accepting an 1891 diary festooned with '1891' throughout it can be easily explained away with a seemingly unlimited supply of Ifs, Buts, and Maybes, but other people hear the Ifs, Buts, and Maybes and realise that a truly unlikely scenario is being constructed to shoehorn in to a theory elements which seem on the surface (yes, 'obviously' and 'logically') to be impossible to justifiably shoehorn in whilst still keeping a straight face.

It feels for all the world like the Earth is flat. It feels for all the world that the sun revolves around the Earth. But are these two the only possibilities you are willing to consider?

PS Honestly, mate, it's pointless hanging on the coat tails of someone who demands you believe something which is patently untrue (that there is only one interpretation of an event possible). It's even more pointless engaging with them but I appreciate that you are still a long way away yet from that conclusion.