Quote:
Originally Posted by sjkted
As you know, much of the issues we are looking at are very complex. I'm not sure about you, but I'm not an expert in physics, chemistry, astronomy, ancient languages, religion, etc.
|
Nor do I claim to be an expert on these things either.
However I doubt that kind of complex knowledge is required in order for one to discern a genuine individual from a possible fraud. Because I was under the impression that this is the issue expressed in this thread, correct? About some or 'all' of the PC whistleblowers? - this has nothing to do with religion, languages, astronomy, etc. And Zecharia Sitchen is a moot point... if you consider yourself inadequately capable of discerning Sitchen's work using your own common sense, then that's your problem, not everyone else's.
When you say: "Yes, we can all do our own analysis, but it will obviously be heavily biased"
I ask you, and this wouldn't be the case with Cliff High as well?
So you're basically saying that we should depend on the views of Cliff High for discerning genuine honest individuals from outright liars? His opinion isn't biased, only ours?
If you don't have the time to do your own investigation, nor have the inclination, and you really find the matter so difficult, then you probably do need someone to force their opinion on you. But this isn't the case with me, and I'm sure not the case with most other people as well.
Peace