Plenty of evidence has been provided, it's up to you whether or not you choose to accept it. Accusing others of lying changes nothing.
Unfortunately you can keep telling them until you're blue in the face and it still won't register. 'Head against a brick wall' comes to mind. Hopefully a legal challenge will make them see sense
The council can waste as much money as it wants. It still won't get sightseers to visit Leicester. I wonder how long it'll take for the council to claw back the £850,000 it's already blown on that old school building, not even counting the costs of converting it into a 'visitor attraction'. (And sorry, I simply don't believe the 'majority' of people in Leicester are remotely interested. The low numbers that have turned up to see the current exhibition at the Guildhall proves that.)
First, you're still just assuming that the purchase of the school building is a cash generating venture. That it's unlikely to turn a profit should actually give you a clue that it's not just a money making venture.
Second, your believing or not believing that the majority of people are interested or not doesn't actually change reality you know. You didn't see the Richard III utter mania that gripped the city when the outcome of testing was pending.
Unfortunately you can keep telling them until you're blue in the face and it still won't register. 'Head against a brick wall' comes to mind. Hopefully a legal challenge will make them see sense
You do of course realise that you're addressing someone who thinks that this "evidence" amounts to this:
There's plenty of circumstantial evidence for his wishes, and love of Yorkshire. Both in the time and money he spent there, the proportion of his life he lived there, his plans for additions to the Minster and Monk's Bar, his adoption of Yorkshire as his own (and theirs of him), and the city's emotional connection prior to, and after his death.
Convince yourselves all you want to, but evidence has been provided, and you have read it. We're just going round in circles now.
Was this it by any chance?
There's plenty of circumstantial evidence for his wishes, and love of Yorkshire. Both in the time and money he spent there, the proportion of his life he lived there, his plans for additions to the Minster and Monk's Bar, his adoption of Yorkshire as his own (and theirs of him), and the city's emotional connection prior to, and after his death.
I'm off to bed. Night!
Stick with the dreams. They're more comforting than reality for some
First, you're still just assuming that the purchase of the school building is a cash generating venture. That it's unlikely to turn a profit should actually give you a clue that it's not just a money making venture.
Cool. So it'll be free entry! Yay.
Second, your believing or not believing that the majority of people are interested or not doesn't actually change reality you know. You didn't see the Richard III utter mania that gripped the city when the outcome of testing was pending.
Unfortunately you can keep telling them until you're blue in the face and it still won't register. 'Head against a brick wall' comes to mind. Hopefully a legal challenge will make them see sense
Yes, you can keep on telling us something while being utterly unable to produce any proper evidence for it, and for some strange reason we are not convinced.
Yes, you can keep on talking about 'descendants' of Richard III when none exist, and for some strange reason we are still not convinced.
Have you ever thought that if you provided some actual direct evidence that Richard the III wished to be buried in York, that this is not just a myth, then perhaps you would be more convincing.
Except, of course you can't provide any evidence, because it doesn't exist.
will we see the pro-York people actually produce proper documentary evidence of their claims that there are descendants of Richard the III, or that there is direct evidence that Richard the III stated that he wanted to be buried in York.
Yes, you can keep on telling us something while being utterly unable to produce any proper evidence for it, and for some strange reason we are not convinced.
Ah, 'proper evidence', you mean a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth, lol
Are you saying that if something has an admission fee, that's it's a money-making venture? If so, then doesn't the same apply to the loss-making York Minster?
Ah, 'proper evidence', you mean a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth, lol
No, we mean something a bit less airy-fairy, handy-wavy than:
Both in the time and money he spent there, the proportion of his life he lived there, his plans for additions to the Minster and Monk's Bar, his adoption of Yorkshire as his own (and theirs of him), and the city's emotional connection prior to, and after his death.
Please, please show me any documented evidence of Richard expressing any wish to be buried in York and I'll sign the petition immediately.
I'd love to see the 'documented evidence' he expressed a wish to be buried in Leicester.:D Or even, say, have a chapel built with 100 people praying for his soul. In Leicester. (Whether intended as mausoleum or not is irrelevant, really).
As Mr H said - if you were killed in a car crash no one would beg to bury you by the road where it happened. This was not an entirely fun county for him. Just decency not to leave him there.
Are you saying that if something has an admission fee, that's it's a money-making venture? If so, then doesn't the same apply to the loss-making York Minster?
Sometimes it's better to think before posting.
Personally I wouldn't compare a centuries-old Gothic cathedral, one of the nation's most important medieval monuments, in need of constant maintenance with a rundown old Victorian school. But maybe you're starved of old buildings in Leicester and any old rubbish is better than nothing.
As you said, sometimes it's better to think before posting.
I'd love to see the 'documented evidence' he expressed a wish to be buried in Leicester.
I really think you need to bone up (see what I did there? ) on what's known as the negative proof fallacy. Have a look at tu quoque while you're at it.
Ah, 'proper evidence', you mean a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth, lol
A direct statement by Richard III recorded by a reliable source would do. A letter written by Richard would do. There are surviving letters written by Richard III. Do any of them express a wish to be buried in York?
If it were Richard III's wish to be buried in York, there are plenty of reasonable ways that evidence for it could be found. If there was any.
And of course, a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth would do as well.
Last time I went inside York Mister I used my York Card which locals have. Got in for free. As locals do.
As they are the ones who feel this most strongly, and don't have to pay to go in the Minster anyway - why the big fuss about whether you pay or not? TBH, Leicester cathedral would get zero visitors if they had to pay so that is never gonna happen.
I'd love to see the 'documented evidence' he expressed a wish to be buried in Leicester.:D Or even, say, have a chapel built with 100 people praying for his soul. In Leicester. (Whether intended as mausoleum or not is irrelevant, really).
There is no documented evidence that Richard III wished to be buried anywhere. That is the entire point.
A direct statement by Richard III recorded by a reliable source would do. A letter written by Richard would do. There are surviving letters written by Richard III. Do any of them express a wish to be buried in York?
If it were Richard III's wish to be buried in York, there are plenty of reasonable ways that evidence for it could be found. If there was any.
And of course, a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth would do as well.
Almost every statement I've read that has been issued by the country's most prominent medieval historians have repeatedly said that i) he would've wanted to be buried at York Minster or Wesminster Abbey and ii) he would never have wanted to be buried at Leicester. But if you know better...
Oh look, Larry and Curly have been on the case, here comes Moe.
I really think you need to bone up (see what I did there? ) on what's known as the negative proof fallacy. Have a look at tu quoque while you're at it.
Ah that is the negative proof fallacy that only cuts one way? Handy!:)
Comments
Unfortunately you can keep telling them until you're blue in the face and it still won't register. 'Head against a brick wall' comes to mind. Hopefully a legal challenge will make them see sense
First, you're still just assuming that the purchase of the school building is a cash generating venture. That it's unlikely to turn a profit should actually give you a clue that it's not just a money making venture.
Second, your believing or not believing that the majority of people are interested or not doesn't actually change reality you know. You didn't see the Richard III utter mania that gripped the city when the outcome of testing was pending.
You do of course realise that you're addressing someone who thinks that this "evidence" amounts to this:
And that's, errm, it
Stick with the dreams. They're more comforting than reality for some
Cool. So it'll be free entry! Yay.
No, I didn't see it, lol.
Yes, you can keep on telling us something while being utterly unable to produce any proper evidence for it, and for some strange reason we are not convinced.
Yes, you can keep on talking about 'descendants' of Richard III when none exist, and for some strange reason we are still not convinced.
Have you ever thought that if you provided some actual direct evidence that Richard the III wished to be buried in York, that this is not just a myth, then perhaps you would be more convincing.
Except, of course you can't provide any evidence, because it doesn't exist.
Still vastly more convincing that Leicester's 'evidence', which amounts of little more than 'he's been dead here for 500 years'.
Almost the only people who think he should stay in Leicester are um...people in Leicester.
Ah, 'proper evidence', you mean a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth, lol
How rude.
Are you saying that if something has an admission fee, that's it's a money-making venture? If so, then doesn't the same apply to the loss-making York Minster?
Sometimes it's better to think before posting.
Oh yes, good old Viv, with her cronies in Leicester. Nothing suspicious about that at all.
I'd love to see the 'documented evidence' he expressed a wish to be buried in Leicester.:D Or even, say, have a chapel built with 100 people praying for his soul. In Leicester. (Whether intended as mausoleum or not is irrelevant, really).
As Mr H said - if you were killed in a car crash no one would beg to bury you by the road where it happened. This was not an entirely fun county for him. Just decency not to leave him there.
Personally I wouldn't compare a centuries-old Gothic cathedral, one of the nation's most important medieval monuments, in need of constant maintenance with a rundown old Victorian school. But maybe you're starved of old buildings in Leicester and any old rubbish is better than nothing.
As you said, sometimes it's better to think before posting.
I really think you need to bone up (see what I did there?
A direct statement by Richard III recorded by a reliable source would do. A letter written by Richard would do. There are surviving letters written by Richard III. Do any of them express a wish to be buried in York?
If it were Richard III's wish to be buried in York, there are plenty of reasonable ways that evidence for it could be found. If there was any.
And of course, a signed last will and testament written by Richard III on his way to Bosworth would do as well.
As they are the ones who feel this most strongly, and don't have to pay to go in the Minster anyway - why the big fuss about whether you pay or not? TBH, Leicester cathedral would get zero visitors if they had to pay so that is never gonna happen.
I can finish my cup of tea first, can't I?
And now I have.
There is no documented evidence that Richard III wished to be buried anywhere. That is the entire point.
Almost every statement I've read that has been issued by the country's most prominent medieval historians have repeatedly said that i) he would've wanted to be buried at York Minster or Wesminster Abbey and ii) he would never have wanted to be buried at Leicester. But if you know better...
Ah that is the negative proof fallacy that only cuts one way? Handy!:)
And there's plenty of circumstantial evidence that he wanted to be buried at York or at Westminster Abbey.