Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R.L.S., H.J., & E.H.: a questions of sources and results

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • David Orsam
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Isnīt it sufficient with the "explanations" given by the attackers "Henry Flower", "David Orsam" and "GUT"?
    I, for one, haven't put forward any explanation so this remark is very strange. Obviously Pierre is just evading a simple, reasonable and polite question.

    Henry has, of course, nailed it. And when Pierre saw that one of the characters in the play was Sir Thomas White, the Lord Mayor of London, he realised he had found was the conclusive proof he was looking for.

    Queen Mary, Princess Elizabeth and the Lord Mayor all in one play!! It could only mean one thing. Gogmagog is Jack the Ripper!

    Leave a comment:


  • Henry Flower
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    I've been included as one if the attackers, at least I'm in good company.
    How dare you, sir! I am an amoral animal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    Why not. (You might get a tax deduction anyway).

    Doesn't take much for that one to claim to be an expert on anything.

    Still can't believe he claims to be a great historian
    Silly GUT, I can't. I don't know the secret of the power for the motors of the "Nautilus" (Verne and "Nemo's" "Nautilus", not the actual one that is now at Groton's Submarine museum in Connecticut, which I have visited - that's a nuclear powered one). '

    The limits to my knowledge of how to power pre-Holland and Lake subs is that of the U.S.S. Turtle (Bushnell's Revolutionary craft), and the C.S.S. Hunley (now found and being restored in Charleston), both of which were powered by men using cranks. Captain Nemo's men had some electricity, but the motors were run by something that wasn't quite explained.

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Isnīt it sufficient with the "explanations" given by the attackers "Henry Flower", "David Orsam" and "GUT"?

    Pierre
    I've been included as one if the attackers, at least I'm in good company.

    Leave a comment:


  • Henry Flower
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Isnīt it sufficient with the "explanations" given by the attackers "Henry Flower", "David Orsam" and "GUT"?

    Pierre
    I take that as confirmation that I was more or less right. Thanks Pierre. Am adding you to my buddy list

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Pcdunn View Post
    I see the beat goes on...

    Happy (Belated) New Year, all.
    Back at ya.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    Originally posted by Pcdunn View Post
    I see the beat goes on...

    Happy (Belated) New Year, all.
    Belatedly, Happy New Year to you too!

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Mayerling View Post

    Yes he might. And from my reading Verne's "Twenty Thousand Leagues" maybe I should claim to be an expert on building privately owned, palatial submarines!
    Why not. (You might get a tax deduction anyway).

    Doesn't take much for that one to claim to be an expert on anything.

    Still can't believe he claims to be a great historian

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Isnīt it sufficient with the "explanations" given by the attackers "Henry Flower", "David Orsam" and "GUT"?

    Pierre
    Perhaps, but the enquiry was directed to you. This was not an inquiry into what your central theory is, but just how exactly you ended up acquainted with this play by Tennyson. Telling me won't damage your control over your own work, it just informs me about your reading a bit. That's all.

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Mayerling View Post
    Sounds very reasonable Henry, but I'd like him to explain it, if he could.

    Jeff
    Isnīt it sufficient with the "explanations" given by the attackers "Henry Flower", "David Orsam" and "GUT"?

    Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Pcdunn
    replied
    I see the beat goes on...

    Happy (Belated) New Year, all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Henry Flower
    replied
    Originally posted by Mayerling View Post

    Yes, but I did read it. Someone should pay for that!

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    [QUOTE=GUT;405131]
    Originally posted by Henry Flower View Post


    But don't you know the next degree he will claim is literature.
    Yes he might. And from my reading Verne's "Twenty Thousand Leagues" maybe I should claim to be an expert on building privately owned, palatial submarines!

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    Originally posted by Henry Flower View Post
    He is busy decoding his gogmagog letter. Intrigued by the grand gilt coach he Googles the phrase. The third link takes him to Letters of Tennyson 1851-1870, which opens to a letter using a similar phrase. He goes to online-literature.com to explore some works of Tennyson, the third piece in the list of works is Queen Mary: A Drama. That's probably enough for him. He glanced at the link for the Dramatis Personae. He wrongly assumes it's the other Queen Mary, notes the presence of a Princess Elizabeth. It's done.

    That is what the poster calls researching, analyzing sources. He loves the phrase internal and external source criticism, but we saw no evidence that he'd actually done anything more substantial than what I just did.
    Sounds very reasonable Henry, but I'd like him to explain it, if he could.

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    [QUOTE=Henry Flower;405090]
    Originally posted by Mayerling View Post

    Jeff, I admire your gift for comedy!

    The idea that he read the play!
    Yes, but I did read it. Someone should pay for that!

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X