Monday, May 08, 2006

I appear to have been flamed

Hmm.

Predictably, I suppose, it's on the King Arthur post.

4 comments:

Gabriele C. said...

I admire your patience in politely replying to that post. I'd have deleted the flamer. :)

Tony Keen said...

They wren't quite rude enough to warrant deletion. If they come back, then that may well be their fate.

Alex Bordessa said...

Obviously, I'd better not say what I think of the Sarmatian theories either :-) In fact, I no longer enter into any debate about the period, as it seems to bring out the worst in some people (criticism of people's pet theories are not allowed y'know!). However, it doesn't stop me being rude about KA as it's just a bad film all round, never mind the Sarmatian business.

Tony Keen said...

In some ways it's quite fascinating how the whole Artorius/Sarmatians bit reveals people's inability to follow processes of logical argument and the rules of evidence. If you believe in the Sarmatian connection, and that Artorius is the 'original' of Arthur, it's quite likely that he had some association the the Sarmatians. But you have to establish the two propositions independently. Instead, people take the conclusion from the propositions, and use it as a reason to believe the propositions, despite the lack of actual evidence.

And yes, you get no thanks from some quarters for pointing out that the King has no clothes on.