Giving an answer that does not satisfy the question is not an answer.
The threads you list do not substantiate your fatuous claim that the absence of references to the the bodily Assumption of Mary in scripture is evidence FOR such an occurrence, merely that said absence does not conflict with scripture...what I have been maintaining, and you have been denying, all along.
Your inability to accept that logical distinction does not change the fact that it makes perfect sense, and your characterization of it is false.
The only scriptural reference to a queen of heaven is pagan. It’s always been pagan and still is pagan. The point of that post was to show that the RCC uses lack of denial in scripture to make up doctrine. The question was asked to show where anyone used the excuse that if scripture didn’t say it didn’t happen then the doctrine is possible and therefore valid. We showed that indeed people used lack of denial in scripture as justification for doctrine.