Four races, 3 1/2 different men win...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ May 16 2008, 11:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Makes you think that Puig probably told Pedrosa to skittle Nicky at Estoril 2006!!!!!!!!!!
If you must know, this actually is the truth. Hell, why not? I suppose its on the same order of Pig blaming Nicky for the disaster. If we are to believe that, then anything if fair game.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 16 2008, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Are you sure? Exactly which part do you think is untrue and can you support it with any evidence or is it one of your many assumptions?
Lex has as much proof as those detracting his arguments, like you and those on this thread. The difference, it requires more of an imagination to read between the lines, than the sheep reading the lines and swallowing it as truth. Who is more of a sucker?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 16 2008, 12:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't think anyone is particularly a sucker, Lex' theories are clearly his own creation. I'm asking questions to see if his ideas can be supported by any reasoning i can share with him, but like you said its his imagination rather than evidence.
Likewise, as I said, sheep are no better off.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ May 16 2008, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I have an unfair advantage over lex tho Jumkie. Its called a brain, which is backed up with the ability to use it. lex's brain has been ...... up by what looks like over exposure to the XFiles, along with prolonged hallucenogenic abuse.

Or maybe he's as thick as ..... .... knows.
Perhaps, but what I know of the world is this: what they often tell you and what is truth is almost always different if not opposite. I don't see why this sport would be immune or different than any other microcosm. Its so much easier to say to somebody with an imagination that they are full of .... (and yes sometimes they really are) but the idea of reading between the lines has its foundation on the fact that truth and what is reported often need reconciliation.

Here is what I'd say, if anybody here on this thread has not speculated about the truth of events, then cast the first stone.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 16 2008, 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Shoehorning: nThe process of force-fitting current events into one's personal or political agenda/theories. In such instances events are typically shoehorned to fit vague statements or vice -versa. This can seem bold, but can often be an extremely safe procedure since they can't be proven wrong owing to the ease to which one can make confirmation of a claim after the fact - especially if you give them wide latitude in making the 'shoe' fit.

Lex has no way of sustantiating his claims, as they are by nature unprovable- but such claims however peposterous they may seem can't be disproved either. Their main purpose is to support/call attention to his original thread/agenda.

This is nothing more than confirmation bias on Lexicons part, - selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and look for what confirms ones beliefs, and to ignore or undervalue the relevance of that which contradicts ones beliefs.

One of the most peruasive things on any forum is concensus; and for better or worse in this instance Lex refuses to concede that there may be a flaw in any of his reasoning despite the fact that the tide of opinion is against him.

Jumkie, I'm afraid it requires a colourful and over fertile imagination to say the least to 'read between the lines' and concur with Lex's thread. The concensus view is against him here. If that means following the flock then so be it, although I commend Lexicon for being a lamb to the slaughter in posting such contraversial improbable views.

Well thought out reply, thanks. Easily refutable though, "consensus" is no more of value than the "consensus" that learned justices on supreme courts have ruled against what was later show to be incorrect, but did so at the time because there was "consensus".

As far as a forum goes, at one point, it was the "consensus" of this forum that all things Rossi were right, any challenge to that was wrong.

As far as "shoehorning", I suppose apply this to most everybody on here (including myself). It doesn't make Lex any less of a bullshitter, but it does put us in the same boat.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ May 16 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Sorry I mate, I just think it's the words of a ........
Well I have asked Lex if he was on drugs on another thread. (Perhaps only to see if he had some good .... I was not aware of).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 16 2008, 01:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Not a very watertight one though.

You're so right about concensus Jumkie and that's a frightening thought - I reconsider that element of my last post. But I'd like to think that there's still some amongst us that can rely on innate instinct to discern between the good and the bad, the valid and the invalid and in a wider sense the right from the wrong.
Agree.