Henry, et Listers,
Well, Henry, there's been a lot of water under the bridge since your
posting and had I known then what I know now, I might have responded a
little bit differently. On the specific point as to whether car #523 is
authentic or not, the evidence appears to be mounting in support of Norm's
published position. Now I'll admit that responding to your question with
"Is this the best you can do??" sounds a bit deprecating; and frankly it
was meant that way. But, can you really expect me to take your question at
face value considering your history of postings and your decidedly
one-sided views on Norm, TAC, authentication, etc.? Now don't get me wrong;
you're undoubtedly a helluva nice guy. Anybody who has Tiger owners as
friends can't be that bad. It would seem, however, since you don't own a
Tiger, that you must just enjoy stirring up controversy. Hey, I can relate
to that too!! So, when you threw this little political hand grenade into
the Tiger's den under the guise of an innocent question, I couldn't resist
being just a little sarcastic.
After all the further postings on this thread, I'm not sure if much of what
you say in your latest message is still relevant. I am also, as is typical
with your postings, still trying to follow your train of thought. I guess
you are still wondering "what if" Norm is wrong and car #523 isn't a
conversion. If this was really a hypothetical question, why talk about this
specific car? I think most people know that you consistently use this forum
to grind a very obvious axe and are just doing it again. But, I actually
prefer you old style of swaggering down the middle of the street with both
guns blazing to this new sniping behind the guise of innocence crap.
Bob
At 03:22 AM 8/24/98 -0400, HW200@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 98-08-22 21:26:32 EDT, rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu writes:
>
><< Henry,
>
> Is this the best you can do?? Don't shoot the messenger here. Norm just
> posted this on his Web page a few months ago and now passed on to the list
> the latest chapter for this car. I understand the car has been inspected on
> several occassions by the "experts" and there is no doubt about its
> lineage. >>
>I am not shooting anybody, I just stated a "what if" question with regards to
>the dreaded "C" next to that Mk2 in the registry. What if it was a
mistake? So
>far Bob-
>I have the impression no experts have inspected the car-(according to Paul),
>so to this point in your arguement the only confirmation is in the registry.
>Furthermore you stated it was on a web page somewhere but now you can't find
>it. Whatever policies and procedures you go on (AND ON) about I do not
>know....I just asked a simple question. I guess Bob this is the best I can
do.
>Your soap box, however, seems to be made out of soap and not wood.
>Henry
>
Robert L. Palmer
Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego
rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
rpalmer@cts.com
|