- This topic has 8 voices and 51 replies.
-
Posts
-
… your assertion that Adams was there and far closer than Irving is both true and entirely irrelevant. Why you inserted that irrelevancy is still an unanswered question
Indeed?
I have made some sweeping statements about the evidence which, if not true, could be proven to be incorrect simply by showing evidence otherwise. Did any contemporary of GW claim that GW, or for that matter any other president, appended shmG to their oath of office? Did any 18th or early 19th century newspaper, letter, manuscript, government document, etc. claim that GW, or for that matter any other 18th or early 19th century president, appended shmG to their oath of office? I say no, none did. Of course, I could be wrong….
While this may be true, my irrelevant take on the matter is this: just as skiguy said it might be simply that no one at the time saw it as noteworthy. You correctly state that lack of evidence against isn't proof of nor is lack of evidence for disproof. History is often the best guess based on what we have… changes when (if) new info. sufaces. Hope this answers your question.
While this may be true, my irrelevant take on the matter is this: just as skiguy said it might be simply that no one at the time saw it as noteworthy. You correctly state that lack of evidence against isn't proof of nor is lack of evidence for disproof. History is often the best guess based on what we have… changes when (if) new info. sufaces. Hope this answers your question.
Of course, no can disprove XYZ was said because it may not have been recorded, much like we cannot prove that there are no Leprechauns because they may be very good at hiding and leaving no evidence. But an inability to prove that XYZ was not said cannot reasonably justify the Senate Historical Office or the JCCIC asserting that XYZ was said anymore than we can justify asserting that Leprechauns are historical facts. This is so obvious that I didn't think there was a need to respond to skiguy.
I agree that the SHO should rethink and waffle a bit on this one; makes for too much flapdoddle ala the Hancock quote; just say that it is “supposed” or is “believed”. It seemed however that you had stonewalled ski's thoughts on the matter. My apology if that wasn't the case.This all doesn't really matter one way or the other though; Washington didn't do a lot of things that have been attributed to him and likely did lots that have been forgotten. NBD to most of the world and life goes on.I'll not comment on the Leprechaun issue… as I'm currently reading the 4th Harry Potter. 😉
I am one who are always after their Lucky Charms, so if they don't exist why are the charms so dang tasty?
Book: “Union 1812″Author: AJ LangguthQuote: “Livingston administered the oath of office to the first president, and at its conclusion Washington said “I solemnly swear, etc” “So help me God” With that, Washington bent forward and kissed the Bible on which he had be sworn”I just read that, thought it was interesting.
