Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Morality without god
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1201 of 1221 (701030)
06-10-2013 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 1199 by Theodoric
06-10-2013 11:31 AM


Re: Ireland
Theodoric, I meant to come back and remind you and forgot: I wasn't using that list as support for arguments about Patrick. I already said that all I have for that is Bennett and the book I reviewed a couple years ago, and the two writings I know of by Patrick. We'd gotten off the subject onto the general subject of the history of RCC falsifications. That's what the books at my blog are about.
By the way a historian is somebody who has studied the history of a subject, period. If they provide sources and all those books do, some many pages of sources, that's their credentials.
Paul Serup spent something like twenty years researching his book on Lincoln, Saussy spent ten years on his book.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1199 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 11:31 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1202 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 9:00 PM Faith has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 1202 of 1221 (701044)
06-10-2013 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1201 by Faith
06-10-2013 5:27 PM


Re: Ireland
I wasn't using that list as support for arguments about Patrick.
Well that confirms you have no support for those arguments. If you did you would have presented it.
Paul Serup spent something like twenty years researching his book on Lincoln, Saussy spent ten years on his book.
What a waste because they got it all wrong. They manipulated the info in order to try to support their premise. Sort of like a creationist. I suppose you think there is some sort of conspiracy since no real historian supports them.
By the way a historian is somebody who has studied the history of a subject, period. If they provide sources and all those books do, some many pages of sources, that's their credentials.
No. That is why they had to self publish. Though history is one of the soft sciences, there is still a process of peer review for scholarly writings. Publishing companies also try to some extent make sure arguments presented stand up to historical review. None of these do.
You obviously have no idea what the word "credentials" means. Your comments are insulting and demeaning to historians that are degreed and have spent years studying the process as well as the subject matter.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1201 by Faith, posted 06-10-2013 5:27 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1203 by Faith, posted 06-10-2013 10:10 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 1209 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 12:02 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1203 of 1221 (701046)
06-10-2013 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1202 by Theodoric
06-10-2013 9:00 PM


Books About Catholicism
What a waste because they got it all wrong. They manipulated the info in order to try to support their premise. Sort of like a creationist. I suppose you think there is some sort of conspiracy since no real historian supports them.
You've read the books? I did read Saussy's and found some things I can't agree with but mostly toward the end of the book where he takes some leaps.
I understand Serup culled newspapers from the time and quoted from everything he could find on the subject. He had no premise to begin with. You ought to pay more attention to the facts. I don't even think he's a Christian. The evidence was good enough without his book that Lincoln was murdered by Jesuits anyway.
Find some "real historians" before the twentieth century, Theodoric. The later ones have often manipulated the facts. Yes, there is a conspiracy to protect the RCC from the truth.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1202 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 9:00 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1204 of 1221 (701048)
06-10-2013 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1199 by Theodoric
06-10-2013 11:31 AM


Books about Catholicism
Here's the publisher of J D Fulton's Washington in the Lap of Rome:
PUBLISHED BY W. KELLAWAY,
(OFFICE OF THE FREE PRESS,)
TREMONT TEMPLE.
COPYRIGHT, JUSTIN D. FULTON. 1888.
Is that self-published?
That book also has a chapter on Lincoln's killers
He was certainly a firebrand against Catholicism, does that make him wrong? He was even stoned by a Catholic crowd for it. So was ex-priest Charles Chiniquy stoned and shot at by Catholics for his anti-Catholic speeches and book, Fifty Years in the "Church" of Rome. Chiniquy was falsely accused by his Bishop who objected to his attempts to reform the Church, and defended by Lincoln, who won the case, which was the reason for the Jesuits' hatred of Lincoln.
Paul Serup's investigation into the Lincoln assassination began with reading Chiniquy's book thirty years ago. He wanted to prove to himself whether Chiniquy's claim was right or not and got so deeply into the subject it ended up a book.
A quick check of some of the other books on my list shows they weren't self-published: Walsh's book on the Oxford Movement, Jacopo Leone's book on the Jesuits, Henry T Hudson's Papal Power. Chiniquy's book was republished by Chick Publications, don't know who originally published it.
THIS IS ALL OFF TOPIC. WE NEED EITHER TO END THIS DISCUSSION OR TAKE IT TO A NEW THREAD.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1199 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 11:31 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1205 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 11:12 PM Faith has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 1205 of 1221 (701051)
06-10-2013 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1204 by Faith
06-10-2013 10:52 PM


Re: Books about Catholicism
Is that self-published?
Yes.
Tremont Temple is the Baptist church where he was the pastor.
A quick check of some of the other books on my list shows they weren't self-published:
Never claimed that all were.
Henry T Hudson's Papal Power
Published by Trinity Foundation. Basically published by a church. Can find nothing about authors credentials
Chiniquy's book was republished by Chick Publications
Enough said. Chick has been publishing lies for years.
THIS IS ALL OFF TOPIC.
I don't think so. I think people are getting a good view of your "christian" morality as opposed to my atheist morality.
I find no reason to lie or rely on liars to support my views.
Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1204 by Faith, posted 06-10-2013 10:52 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1206 by Faith, posted 06-11-2013 2:03 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1206 of 1221 (701061)
06-11-2013 2:03 AM
Reply to: Message 1205 by Theodoric
06-10-2013 11:12 PM


Re: Books about Catholicism
Tremont Temple is the Baptist church where he was the pastor.
I looked for that information and couldn't find it and in fact IIRC the address for the publisher was in a different state from his church and I didn't find a name for his church.
A quick check of some of the other books on my list shows they weren't self-published:
Never claimed that all were.
I felt it necessary to check because you made such a big to-do about a couple you'd found to be self-published.
Henry T Hudson's Papal Power
Published by Trinity Foundation. Basically published by a church. Can find nothing about authors credentials
The Trinity site has:
Dr. Henry T. Hudson was born and reared in England and served with the Royal Military Police. He holds diplomas and degrees from Grace Bible College, Malone College, Chicago Graduate School of theology, Kent State University, and American Christian College.
Amazon carries twelve books by him.
But the Trinity Foundation is not a Church, it's a Christian-based organization that promotes a Christian philosophical worldview and does a lot of publishing of out of print books.
Chiniquy's book was republished by Chick Publications
Enough said. Chick has been publishing lies for years.
No, Chick publishes a viewpoint you disagree with, period. They also publish some out of print books as does Trinity. The book by Chiniquy speaks for itself, but if you dismiss it out of hand based on your prejudices that doesn't speak well for you. (The substance of your argument often seems to amount to calling people liars.)
THIS IS ALL OFF TOPIC.
I don't think so. I think people are getting a good view of your "christian" morality as opposed to my atheist morality.
I find no reason to lie or rely on liars to support my views.
I have not told one lie to you at any point. I COULD say you are lying about that but apparently you believe it, false though it is.
Anyway, it's amazing that you would believe that all those books were written by people who just love to lie for no good reason. What on earth could they gain by that, or I either?
And funny you don't seem to see how bias-driven your own thinking is.
And you are wrong about the topic problem, we are off topic.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1205 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 11:12 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1207 by Theodoric, posted 06-11-2013 4:32 PM Faith has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 1207 of 1221 (701101)
06-11-2013 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1206 by Faith
06-11-2013 2:03 AM


Re: Books about Catholicism
I looked for that information and couldn't find it and in fact IIRC the address for the publisher was in a different state from his church and I didn't find a name for his church.
Surprising how IIRC is not evidence. I think the problem is that you have no idea how to do even basic research.
Read and weep
quote:
But his biographer, Dr. Justin D. Fulton, who was Pastor of the Tremont Temple Baptist Church from about 1863 to 1873..
The Trinity site has:
Dr. Henry T. Hudson was born and reared in England and served with the Royal Military Police. He holds diplomas and degrees from Grace Bible College, Malone College, Chicago Graduate School of theology, Kent State University, and American Christian College.
Which means nothing. What are the degrees in? It seems he has not written anything that would be remotely scholarly.
Amazon carries twelve books by him.
Yes all of them seem to be from vanity press publishers. Can't confirm Whitest Blue publishers as there seems to be nothing about them. But the rest all are.
Amazon will sell any book. It is not a mark of quality.
Chick publishes a viewpoint you disagree with, period.
This SPLC lists them as a hate group. Nuff said.
Source
Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1206 by Faith, posted 06-11-2013 2:03 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1208 by Faith, posted 06-12-2013 3:15 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1208 of 1221 (701127)
06-12-2013 3:15 AM
Reply to: Message 1207 by Theodoric
06-11-2013 4:32 PM


Re: Books about Catholicism
It's really impressive how good you are at debunking an argument based only on something like who published it and who called it a hate group (which isn't surprising coming from the liberal to radical socialist Southern Poverty Law Center, which is not one of MY authorities though apparently it is yours), while not concerning yourself for half an instant with the SUBSTANCE of the argument. Really impressive, Theodoric. Sure way to learn absolutely nothing that might disturb your ingrained assumptions.
Most of these books AREN'T "scholarly" as we think of that term today, they are the work of men who had learned something about a subject and wrote about it for the benefit mostly of Christians. The style of many of the older books is much more casual and more personal and subjective than we are used to today. They have an old fashioned sound to them. None of this in itself discredits the work as far as I can see. And I have no idea what explanation there might be for in-house or self publishing. Might not be what you assume it is. The times were different.
I'm not very familiar with Chick Publications but a quick look at Wikipedia suggests that they are considered a "hate" group BECAUSE they preach against Catholicism. Interesting. You brand me with the word "hate" too for the same reason. It doesn't matter whether there is any actual emotion of hatred involved, or whether some things are truly evil and deserve to be hated, or what the actual truth is of what is being said, if you brand your enemy or enemy viewpoint with an emotion-laden word like "hate" you don't have to think about what they are actually saying or whether there is any truth to it, you can "win" the argument on smear tactics alone. It's a form of violence in a way. Same with branding your opponent a liar. You really want to win that way?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1207 by Theodoric, posted 06-11-2013 4:32 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1216 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-12-2013 11:30 PM Faith has not replied

  
Paul Serup
Junior Member (Idle past 3893 days)
Posts: 15
From: central British Columbia, Canada
Joined: 07-11-2013


Message 1209 of 1221 (702892)
07-12-2013 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1202 by Theodoric
06-10-2013 9:00 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
My name is Paul Serup and I will address a number of statements that Theodoric has made about myself and the book I wrote. Of the fact that my book is self published, you stated, No. That is why they had to self publish. Though history is one of the soft sciences, there is still a process of peer review for scholarly writings. Publishing companies also try to some extent make sure arguments presented stand up to historical review. None of these do.
You do not know me and you do not know why my book was self published. You are ignorant of this, which is a good place to start in regards to what you have said about me and my book, your ignorance.
You say my book is self published. So what? A number of very accomplished authors such a Mark Twain, Margaret Atwood, and Stephen King self published. Authors have done so because they wanted to have more control and they wanted a greater opportunity to participate in the profits from their labours. Does the fact that my book was self published affect the validity of what I said? You assert that this is the case. Henry Holt is a well known publishing company and they published Bill O’Reilly’s recent book on the Lincoln assassination. (Henry Holt & Co. - "Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever" by Bill O'Reilly & Martin Dugard). As the Washington Post reported in an 2011 article by Steven Levingston, O'Reilly’s book was reviewed by the personnel at Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site. It was weighed in the balance and found wanting. At the Post article pointed out, O'Reilly’s book suffers from factual errors and a lack of documentation, according to a study conducted by Rae Emerson, the deputy superintendent of Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site, which is a unit of the National Park Service. Emerson’s review recommended that the book not be sold at Ford Theatre’s NPS store. O’Reilly’s book, published by a major publisher, has not been sold there. My self published book however, was reviewed by this same personnel at Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site and was found to be well documented with footnotes, and approved for sale at Ford Theatre’s NPS store, where it is sold today. Based on what you have stated, you sound like you are not especially well informed. Are you foolish enough however, to think you know more about the Lincoln assassination than the people who work at Ford’s Theatre with the educational and interpretive mission they fulfill at this National Historic Site, the very place the 16th President was assassinated? Steven Levingston’s article was entitled, Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Killing Lincoln’ not for sale at Ford’s Theatre museum bookstore and it pointed out that the premier place to sell a book about the Lincoln assassination is at Ford’s Theatre museum bookstore.
Of myself you state regarding my qualifications, Not a historian. He is an independent researcher". I have not given a great amount of consideration to labels but will now give it some attention since you bring it up. As I mentioned, you stated, Though history is one of the soft sciences, there is still a process of peer review for scholarly writings. Publishing companies also try to some extent make sure arguments presented stand up to historical review. None of these do.
You go on to say in reply to Faith, You obviously have no idea what the word "credentials" means. Your comments are insulting and demeaning to historians that are degreed and have spent years studying the process as well as the subject matter.
Who is a historian in your view? Would someone who has a history degree be a historian? Would a university history professor? How about the chair of the history department of a well known university? Or would a real historian be someone who says things you agree with? How about an editor of a historical journal? How about someone like the man who wrote the Abraham Lincoln Encyclopedia? Surely Joseph George Jr. would qualify as a historian in your eyes. He wrote a paper which was very critical of Charles Chiniquy, published in the well known Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society, when he was chair of the history department of Villanova University. Are you are aware of it? Never heard of it? Why doesn’t that surprise me? Anyway, I would expect that he would qualify as a historian in your view. A chair of the history department of a well-known university who writes a paper published in a prestigious historical journal critical on someone who was an opponent of the Catholic Church. He took Charles Chiniquy to task for being untrustworthy in regards to what he said about his relationship with Abraham Lincoln and the role the Roman Catholic Church played in his death. What George wrote has been cited by others to dismiss what Chiniquy said. This is all well and good but when you go about to show that someone is wrong, you better know what you are talking about and get it right. Joseph George however, made a number of errors, some glaring, in what he said. Apparently the editors of the Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society failed to check what George wrote, as did, for example, the man who wrote Abraham Lincoln Encyclopedia?, Mark E. Neely. As I stated in my book,
the only source given for the entry on Charles Chiniquy in the Abraham Lincoln Encyclopedia, by Mark E. Neely was Professor George. Chiniquy was listed as The principal source of allegations that Abraham Lincoln’s assassination was a Jesuit plot. The sources section of the Abraham Lincoln Encyclopedia noted that Joseph George, Jr.’s ’The Lincoln Writings of Charles P. T. Chiniquy,‘ Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society, LXIX (February 1976), 17-25, is a definitive and interesting refutation of Chiniquy’s claims.
I wrote that It will be shown however, that whatever George accomplished, it definitely wasn’t a refutation of Charles Chiniquy’s allegations. The Yale educated Mark E. Neely won the 1992 Pulitzer Prize for his book, The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties and in 2004, was named the author of one of the three most influential articles in fifty years of civil war history. He was a history professor at several universities. When George’s paper was published, the Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society was a division of the Illinois State Historical Library. I received my copy of February 1976 issue, that contains this paper, from one of the personnel of the I.S.H.L. when I was at the library in Springfield in the early 1990s, doing research on Chiniquy.
Now when you make the kind of blunders that Joseph George made, when you fail to check and catch these errors, then publish what he wrote, when you cite him, again without checking his work, it becomes more difficult to claim to be a historian. If these people can claim to be historians, then I would assert that I have a better claim to be one, as I have not made such mistakes and appear to be the only person who actually did check George’s work. As I said in my book,
Joseph George ended his paper by declaring, Scholars, however, even when tempted to use less sensational passages from Chiniquy’s book, should be wary. There is no evidence to support his claim that he was a close friend of the Sixteenth President’s. This list of Professor George’s errors and research shortcomings, however, should be more than enough to convince all but the truly biased that is it Joseph George‘s work that one should be wary of.
My book contains a review of the mistakes Joseph George made in his paper, as well an analysis and a list of the errors of another three academic, who wrote critically about Chiniquy.
You also said of others, including myself, ...they got it all wrong. They manipulated the info in order to try to support their premise. I manipulated information to try to support my premise according to you. That is quite a statement since you apparently have never had a copy of my book in your hands. Indeed, an absolutely stunning statement if you have never seen a copy. There is the statement, Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts. Yes indeed facts don’t lie, they are just facts, so I do not understand what you are talking manipulating information. Since I got it all wrong though, you should be able to furnish a number of examples of what you are talking about in regards to this. Ford’s Theatre looked hard to find mistakes in my book and didn’t find any so I look forward to hearing of all the examples you hope to find.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Put in blank lines where I detected paragraph breaks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1202 by Theodoric, posted 06-10-2013 9:00 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1210 by Stile, posted 07-12-2013 12:10 PM Paul Serup has not replied
 Message 1211 by Faith, posted 07-12-2013 12:22 PM Paul Serup has replied
 Message 1212 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-12-2013 12:30 PM Paul Serup has not replied
 Message 1214 by ringo, posted 07-12-2013 1:38 PM Paul Serup has not replied
 Message 1217 by Theodoric, posted 07-12-2013 11:43 PM Paul Serup has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 1210 of 1221 (702893)
07-12-2013 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1209 by Paul Serup
07-12-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
Paul Serup writes:
My name is Paul Serup and I will address a number of statements that Theodoric has made about myself and the book I wrote.
Fascinating.
Do you think it's possible for someone to be a moral person without God?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1209 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 12:02 PM Paul Serup has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1211 of 1221 (702894)
07-12-2013 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1209 by Paul Serup
07-12-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
Hi Paul,
I for one am pleased to see you come and post here in response to Theodoric's ridiculous accusations against a book that has as much scholarly support as yours does.
If others are rudely going to complain that it's off topic, however, although the off topic posts are quite lengthy on this thread, perhaps another thread should be started. It would do more justice to your thoughts to have a separate thread anyway. You can start a Coffee House thread without going through Proposed Topics. Just copy and paste your post into a new box under Coffee House.
Or I could start the thread for you since you are not familiar with the formatting here.
What do you say?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1209 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 12:02 PM Paul Serup has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1213 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 1:08 PM Faith has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 1212 of 1221 (702895)
07-12-2013 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1209 by Paul Serup
07-12-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
Please, don't be afraid of this little guy:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1209 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 12:02 PM Paul Serup has not replied

  
Paul Serup
Junior Member (Idle past 3893 days)
Posts: 15
From: central British Columbia, Canada
Joined: 07-11-2013


Message 1213 of 1221 (702899)
07-12-2013 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1211 by Faith
07-12-2013 12:22 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
Yes, please do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1211 by Faith, posted 07-12-2013 12:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1215 by Faith, posted 07-12-2013 1:50 PM Paul Serup has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 1214 of 1221 (702905)
07-12-2013 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1209 by Paul Serup
07-12-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
Paul Serup writes:
My name is Paul Serup and I will address a number of statements that Theodoric has made about myself and the book I wrote.
Does the book you wrote have paragraphs? Do you think it's possible for someone to be a moral person without using paragraphs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1209 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 12:02 PM Paul Serup has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1215 of 1221 (702906)
07-12-2013 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1213 by Paul Serup
07-12-2013 1:08 PM


Re: Ireland/credibility of authors and book
I've started the new thread with Paul's post and hope comments will be posted there rather than here.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1213 by Paul Serup, posted 07-12-2013 1:08 PM Paul Serup has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024