Reply to article by: mariposas morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges <mair_fheal@yahoo.com>
Date written: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 20:44:38 -0700
MsgID:<mair_fheal-0541F1.20443801102004@corp.supernews.com>

If the "evidence" is inconclusive, then it isn't evidence, it is 
insignificant trivia.

stack overflow
recursive function does not bottom

let me push this little chromium switch to reset the processor

its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
because its not evidence because it doesnt lead to your conclusion
stack overflow

darn

Maybe you need to pull your plug instead of doing a reset on yourself?

listen up uh clem
evidence remains evidence whether you like it or not

Everyone knows that so now it is your turn to listen up and hear what you've
been missing all along: In science there is a big difference legitimate evidence
and alleged evidence. Hearsay and meresay is not legitimate evidence...whether
you like it or not.

when you let your desired conclusion decide what is evidence
you are excluding anything that could show you are wrong
simply because it could show you are wrong

My conclusions are always based on the actual evidence, not the alledged or
so-called evidence.

this is the data filtering error that continues to plague
your blessed science

It isn't my science that condemns you, it is everyone's science.

if you want scientifically valid results
you have to account for nearly all the evidence
(a tiny fraction can be ignored as observation error)
whether it supports your conclusions or not

Now all you need to do is figure out what the difference between legitimate
evidence and alleged evidence is.

evidence of ufos exists whether you like it or not
and you have account for it as a psychological phenomenona

All I'm interested in is facts and you have none to support your UFO=ET
conclusion. I'm still waiting for you niwmwits to reply to my original post
rather than your dodge and evade of the issues.

(and not merely dismiss everyone you disagree with as nuts)

I'm sure glad I have never done that...but it is good advice anyway, in case
there are others out there like yourself.

or a terrestial phenomona

i do tire of all you clownshoes pretending to be logical
when you obviously havent a clue what logic is

Too bad you can't tell the difference yourself, otherwise you might accidentally
discover that you stare at a clownshoe everyday when you go to comb your hair in
a mirror.

The Sage

=============================================================
My Home Page      :           http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
=============================================================