| Subject: Re: Ruppert: Advice for Whistleblowers |
| From: Wally Anglesea� <wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> |
| Date: 16/12/2003, 19:55 |
| Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.alien.research,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.paranet.abduct,alt.usenet.kooks |
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 17:34:58 GMT, no name <oobie@doobie.com> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:57:38 GMT, Wally Anglesea™
<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 01:23:20 GMT, no name <oobie@doobie.com> wrote:
Logic isn't your strong point is it, liar?
BWHA. Yeah it is, so is common sense.
Calling me a lair doesn't make me one. The burden of proof is on you to
prove me wrong -- go ahead fool.
Since you refuse to present any evidence that there is anything other
than sand at Groom Lake. Occams Razor suggests one of the following:
Occam says that the rule of parsimony applies. Simply: I'm telling the
truth.
1: You are a kook
2: you are a liar.
Unparsimonous answer, ding bat.
But accurate, kook.
Nuff said.
The burden of proof is on *you* to show that what you have claimed
about Groom Lake is true.
Otherwise, stand as a liar.
Nope, a fact is a fact and can be verified.
But you refuse to do so. That makes you a liar.
You have not disputed the fact
other than to commit logical fallacies of name calling and shooting the
messenger.
post some *evidence*, kook