“With all due respect, I don't think that is an abstract. That form wasn't in use until ten or fifteen years later—they didn't have it; it isn't what they used in the 1960’s. That transcript is just a fake—prepared by someone who had access to later transcripts from the 80’s to use as a form. It is fake.”
135 posted on Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:52:57 AM by David
“With all due respect, I don't think that is an abstract. That form wasn't in use until ten or fifteen years later—they didn't have it; it isn't what they used in the 1960’s. That transcript is just a fake—prepared by someone who had access to later transcripts from the 80’s to use as a form. It is fake.”
I can't imagine which word in #135 you would think in any way stipulates or even implies that any single word in the purported transcript is "actually genuine" in any respect.
On its face, it looks to me as though someone in administration at the U of W was tasked to create a transcript for Stanley that appeared regular on its face; they had access to old style transcripts but only back to the 80's; they assumed as you do that no one will be left around that would recognize that the form is not a 1960's form; probably the person in charge of the fake didn't even know what a 1960's transcript ought to look like.
No, I don't see anything about this one that looks like reliable factual data for any purpose. It is just another fraud perpetrated by Zero's supporters.