Welcome question for Mr. Peterson: Where is the stone box?

Post by **_Polygamy Porter** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:46 am

Jersey Girl wrote:
barrelomonkeys wrote:

Stop it, monkeys! Yer killin' me!

Spitting prune juice all over your screen?

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:51 am

Polygamy Porter wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:
barrelomonkeys wrote:

Stop it, monkeys! Yer killin' me!
Spitting prune juice all over your screen?

Here, Sweetie...you whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine and us girls'll play for ya, k?

Post by **_Polygamy Porter** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:58 am

Jersey Girl wrote:
Polygamy Porter wrote:Here, Sweetie...you whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine and us girls'll play for ya, k?

Is that a picture of your grandkids?

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:02 am

Now, Porter,

I realize that you have mush for brains, but just to drive it home a bit...when someone refers to a photo of "us girls" that includes the "someone" making the reference as being "someone" in the photo.

See how that works?

Post by **_Polygamy Porter** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:06 am

Jersey Girl wrote:Now, Porter,

I realize that you have mush for brains, but just to drive it home a bit...when someone refers to a photo of "us girls" that includes the "someone" making the reference as being "someone" in the photo.

See how that works?

They had color film back then? or is that a painting of "you girls"?

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:29 am

Polygamy Porter wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Now, Porter,

I realize that you have mush for brains, but just to drive it home a bit...when someone refers to a photo of "us girls" that includes the "someone" making the reference as being "someone" in the photo.

See how that works?
They had color film back then? or is that a painting of "you girls"?

Porter, sweetie. See that big thing in front of your face? That's a computer. The picture/painting is a "google image" punkin'. Ya know, like the kind you post on ya know, like a computer?

Post by **_asbestosman** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:31 am

Jersey Girl wrote:Porter, sweetie. See that big thing in front of your face? That's a computer. The picture/painting is a "google image" punkin'. Ya know, like the kind you post on ya know, like a computer?

And IP addresses?
*bows head in shame and walks back off*

;)

Post by **_Polygamy Porter** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:13 am

Jersey Girl wrote:Porter, sweetie. See that big thing in front of your face? That's a computer. The picture/painting is a "google image" punkin'. Ya know, like the kind you post on ya know, like a computer?

Hey Jersey Granny,

You made a reference that one of the girls in the image that you posted was YOU. I asked if they had color film back then to capture a color image of you as a young girl.

The "big thing in front of my face" is not a computer. It is a 23" Apple Cinema HD LCD screen. The computer is about two feet to the left of the screen.

Your age is really showing grandma.

Post by **_Rollo Tomasi** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:24 pm

Daniel Peterson wrote:Anyway, all of us know where the entire text of the letter is to be found.

Unfortunately, the text can't be found in the "mislaid" letter, which is the problem.

Post by **_Rollo Tomasi** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:33 pm

Daniel Peterson wrote:You have far worse sins on your soul than holding a silly opinion on this subject.

Since when did "holding a silly opinion" (of which we are all guilty) constitute a "sin"? Pretty funny, though.

A photocopy of a letter is just a piece of paper, apart from the content.

False. A copy would reflect it is an actual letter from Watson, secretary to the FP, on FP letterhead.

The content is faithfully preserved.

How do we know? There's no way to verify this since the original and all copies of the letter have conveniently disappeared. Pretty sloppy, in my opinion.

Write to Michael Watson. This your concern. It isn't mine.

It should be your concern, since you and Hamblin continue to rely so heavily on the 2nd letter to refute the 1st letter.