In Reply to: Well Clark, that depends upon one's interpretation, I guess. posted by Audiophilander on August 20, 2002 at 14:02:44:
Oh, now we have a whole new category! How many more must there be?Nor do these objections address the physical evidence. It will not do, simply to assert that because it accords with preconceived notions it must *ipso facto* be wrong.
Instead of "better truth" BTW, I should have said "higher truth".
clark
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "doctrinaire revisionism" - clarkjohnsen 07:26:16 08/21/02 (3)
- So, the bottom line is that you agree with Errol Morris's revisionist history, right? - Audiophilander 08:13:59 08/21/02 (2)
- Wrong. - clarkjohnsen 08:23:00 08/21/02 (1)
- Well, I have seen the film and who knows what higher truth means from your perspective. - Audiophilander 10:24:03 08/21/02 (0)