Posted: Mar 12, 2020 10:10 pm
by Thomas Eshuis
We've had enough disengenuous gish-galloping.

This is the OP:
Nevets wrote:This thread is created due to another thread going off topic.
I pulled out of the discussion at the point of being asked "in what way was William the conqueror" connected to the pope.
The argument is an off-shoot from the claim that the pope was behind the sending of British troops to the crusades.
I am in favour of the argument, that the pope, was at the very least, influencial in the sending of British troops during the crusades.
But those against the theory, are questioning the links between William the conqueror and the pope.

[/quote]
At no point did you demonstrate that the pope send British troops. Not the least which because there were no British at that time.
At no point did anyone claim there were no links at all between William I and the pope. Or that William I wasn't Catholic.
At no point did you demonstrate that the pope was influential in sending English troops, beyond calling for a Crusade itself.