[geocentrism] The mountain
- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:00:59 +0000 (GMT)
Philip D
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
From philip madsen Sat Feb 10 04:32:33 2007
Paul said,
"I do marvel at your credulity. You seem always to be poised like a compressed
spring waiting to pounce on MS (not the charity I support [Chuckle]) on the
most sparse and flimsiest of evidence. "
and Paul this was by your own admission without having read the evidence. [1]
So how can you call it sparse and flimsy with that "this means it is false"
tone. [2] Let me remind you that most of the evidence supporting penecillin was
flimsy and sparse as an Australlian, a Jew, and a Pommie did the hard work to
make it proven. [3]
Of course the evidence of a poured concrete pyramid is sparse but not flimsy.
Naturally the problem is different when it concerns a chemistry which not all
can fathom, like DNA evidence , accepted without qualification, by the
unqualified, from the case of MS objection to heavier than air flight, till
the man could actually build the aeroplane and fly.. [4] strange how MS science
never apologises.... NEVER... they slink away, or deny they ever objected.. [5]
and Paul, your objection is based upon your acceptance of the MS consensus of
opinion, not a personal appraisal of the evidence.. [6]
You do likewise regarding your opinions of supernatural phenomena.. MS says it
does not happen, Paul refuses to look at any contrary evidence.. [7]
No wonder you vote for a major party...
Philip..
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
(I do miss being able to intersperse comments in *colour*!)
[1] I did *peruse* the data, but there are only so many hours in a day. If I've
decided wrongly, time will correct that.
[2] No -- it doesn't mean it's false -- just that I am not convinced.
[3] You have to put in the hard yards if you want to change public opinion. Do
you think my role here is one of joy and bliss?
[4] Time was when the US Patent Office did not require a working model in order
to issue a patent. Have you ever noticed the kind of contraptions which got
patents?
[5] Success has a thousand fathers -- failure is an orphan. True for any
philosophy.
[6] ... but there are only so many hours in a day. And anyway, there were not
all that many references to consult, especially those of a peer review type.
[7] Pretty much as for [6]. If I see peer reviewed evidence to the contrary, my
position may well change. (I have made that statement previously. I don't
recall any other participant in this forum making a similar statement).
Paul D
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
