Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThe missing scars are consistent with Pio never having any wounds.
The missing scars are consistent with Pio never having any wounds.
They are also consistent with him being unable to fake them, since he was dead.
A few people spoke on behalf of the Vatican. The main one had a big scary title, something like Head of the Office of Defense and Protection of Dogma. Ironically, he was a meek bald man with glasses.
The one confirmed case was St. Francis.
They are also consistent with him being unable to fake them, since he was dead.
😀
We shouldn't rule out that these so called Church officials are actors with a great sense of humour. The world is full of lies and deceit ... erm ... I mean of course misunderstandings and misconceptions, Dear Doctor ...... and people dó need money .... even actors and documentary makers. 😀
Originally posted by ivanhoeYour paranoia reaches grotesque levels sometimes; are you seriously suggesting that the National Geographic Channel is going to dress up some guys, claim that they're high ranking RCC officials and stick them in a documentary??🙄
The missing scars are consistent with Pio never having any wounds.
They are also consistent with him being unable to fake them, since he was dead.
😀
We shouldn't rule out that these so called Church officials are actors with a great sense of humour. The world is full of lies and deceit ... erm ... I mean of course misunderstandings and misconceptions, Dear Doctor ...... and people dó need money .... even actors and documentary makers. 😀
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeAre you saying that the producers of the National Geographic documentary may have hired actors to portray Vatican officials, and passed them off as the real thing? You are so paranoid.
We shouldn't rule out that these so called Church officials are actors with a great sense of humour.
Originally posted by ivanhoeSo you are suggesting that the documentary makers are faking their evidence. That's known in the legal profession as 'libel'. Be careful of what you say.
The missing scars are consistent with Pio never having any wounds.
They are also consistent with him being unable to fake them, since he was dead.
😀
We shouldn't rule out that these so called Church officials are actors with a great sense of humour. The world is full of lies and deceit ... erm ... I mean of course misunderstandings and misconceptions, Dear Doctor ...... and people dó need money .... even actors and documentary makers. 😀
Speaking of which, why not present us with unequivocal evidence.
2 edits
Originally posted by scottishinnzNo, because libel requires that the claim have potential to be taken seriously. Nobody is going to take yet another of Saint Ivanhoe's paranoid concoctions as anything else.
So you are suggesting that the documentary makers are faking their evidence. That's known in the legal profession as 'libel'.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThey taught me not to believe everything I read in the newspapers or see on the tube ...... The National Geographic documentaries I've seen did not excell in a scientific approach ..... rather popular entertainment I would say.
Are you saying that the producers of the National Geographic documentary may have hired actors to portray Vatican officials, and passed them off as the real thing? You are so paranoid.
2 edits
Originally posted by ivanhoeBut do you actually entertain the idea that those portrayed in the documentary as real Vatican officials might have been merely actors?
They taught me not to believe everything I read in the newspapers or see on the tube ...... The National Geographic documentaries I've seen did not excell in a scientific approach ..... rather popular entertainment I would say.
Since when are you so big on having a scientific approach?
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles"Since when are you so big on having a scientific approach."
But do you actually entertain the idea that those portrayed in the documentary as real Vatican officials might have been merely actors?
Since when are you so big on having a scientific approach?
I always was .... except in case of approaching the likes of Brigitte Bardot of course .....
You must have missed the scientific part then.
1 edit
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles"If you aren't familiar with the English idiom I used to express my lack of knowledge, it's one of indifference and not exasperation, ... "
If you aren't familiar with the English idiom I used to express my lack of knowledge, it's one of indifference and not exasperation, even though it seems otherwise. Language sure can be amusing.
I know ..... who cares ? 😛