vain_shields217
Patron with Honors
children's book I grew up: Roger Redhat, Billy BluehatSorry m8, you've completely lost me there.
children's book I grew up: Roger Redhat, Billy BluehatSorry m8, you've completely lost me there.
Oh, I see. They are new to me. Didn't I just read you were done here? They taught us not to evaluate in scientology but you're not very consistent are you?children's book I grew up: Roger Redhat, Billy Bluehat
In terms of the question Blue asked, did I have any new contributions to make.....Oh, I see. They are new to me. Didn't I just read you were done here? They taught us not to evaluate in scientology but you're not very consistent are you?
Only you...My buddy River Raven was a Tibetan Red Hat Buddhist and a student of Crowley
It's simple enough to see that you wrote them both. It doesn't require a handwriting expert to see it.I can show you that not even I can match that g from giive:
but you will still try to rationalize
simple and incorrectIt's simple enough to see that you wrote them both. It doesn't require a handwriting expert to see it.
Name them.Yeah...
Well I do get around FT...
You'd be amazed how many killers I know...
There is no way to prove what you claim, true or untrue.simple and incorrect
there would be the moment I relocate the 'original' (I'll call it that, as it was the process of making copies that partly accounts for it having gone missing). I could get it forensically analysed (forget graphology, I'm talking about nib pressure and paper analysis: FDHI).There is no way to prove what you claim, true or untrue.
Nice story, who verified it?there would be the moment I relocate the 'original' (I'll call it that, as it was the process of making copies that partly accounts for it having gone missing). I could get it forensically analysed (forget graphology, I'm talking about nib pressure and paper analysis: FDHI).
I'll give you a close equivalent:
M.D. Prodromita << that icon was checked under a microscope and no brush marks could be seen
there's very little to go on, but the year was 1863 and the iconographer's name is given and somewhere there are details saying it was verified by microscope, but I've not been able to ascertain by whom.Nice story, who verified it?
Well thanks, nobody noticed till you posted that. It's out of the bag now.You know...if we reversed the first two words of this thread title as in their opposites and removed telekinesis we probably described the vast majority of our posts on ESMB.
somewhere in that slightly confusingly worded list of questions is some useful observation. But there's no true decisive analysis possible without the original piece of paper, so I truly hope to find it, even though I need not prove it to myselfWhy would you go through the mechanics of writing, with all the attendant characteristics of handwriting, which are brought by distinctions in pressure, right or left handedness, speed, etc. Loops, strokes, lines, ovals, crosses. I guess not sans serif, nor arial?
I guess maybe that you could right or left mind?
Is that ink or pencil headedness??
Have we a handwriting analysis type present?
In other words, the mind writes like it has an arm?somewhere in that slightly confusingly worded list of questions is some useful observation. But there's no true decisive analysis possible without the original piece of paper, so I truly hope to find it, even though I need not prove it to myself