Subject: Re: Crybabies, MacLachlan & Audrey
From: sjohnson@texas.vlsi.sgi.com (Scott Johnson)
Date: 1991-06-21, 22:59
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In <1991Jun21.185843.1475@ncsu.edu> margaret@ecebucolix.ncsu.edu (Margaret Hudacko) writes:

> >In article <1991Jun20.181308.6505@gdt.bath.ac.uk> ch0mpc@gdt.bath.ac.uk (M P CLIFTON) writes:
>> >>   I've been reading this thread for some time. The only _external_
>> >>building damage seen was the blown-out windows. Now, there were _no_
>> >>windows within the vault area, so two rather inconsistent assumptions arise:
>> >>
>> >>      1) The blast was so fierce that it blew out windows in another room,
>> >>         or even perhaps another floor. This seems to indicate that no-one
>> >>         could really have survived.

> >Gee, why should we even assume that the windows we saw blow out were part
> >of the bank at all?  After all, we never SAW the bank beforehand and I
> >don't remember whether or not there was a visible sign in the front of
> >the building saying that it WAS the bank (so there could be an even worse
> >continuity problem under these assumptions...)

Hey, why don't we just drop this line of debate for the possibilty
(I know it's stretching) that these things were used as ARTISTIC 
LISCENSE in an attempt to PROVE A POINT that there was some kind of
damage here. (that is all that is known).  Maybe we could get on
to arguing about some more interesting things, like the species
of Mr. Log Lady, or SDC's favorite brand of coffee.  :-/ :-\

Sheesh.

sj