Re: Am I missing someone? :<

JP May (jpm@TWEB.COM)
Wed, 21 Feb 1996 23:07:10 -0600

>> 1, santa doesnt exist, 2, there was a holocaust, 3, most people want to
>> archive futurec, 4, no-one went poof and created life on earth, 5, the
>> earth is round.
>>
>> These are obviosities.
>(so you keep asserting.)
>
>
>1. sure
>2. yup
>3. we don't have official votes, but it seems that way.
>4. *ahem* Prove It.
>5. right.
>
>
>Don't forget to elucidate your standards (to use Greg's words).
>
>- Deb (gettin' bored)
>

I see - so in a word (point 4) you're a creationist or
possible-creationist. Nuthin' wrong with that. Why didn't just say so?

If your big challenge to me is to prove something ( 4 ) that is obvious,
commonplace, massively documented and everyday, and, to which the _only
alternative_ is something totally in the face of the _entire_ experience
both scientifcally and commonplace-ly of the world, I would ask that before
I undertake that cruelly futile exercise (presumably involving directing
you to a handful of particular books, museums etc), I would ask that you
undertake the equally futile exercise of proving something to me ( 1 ) that
is obvious, commonplace, massively documented and everyday, and, to which
the _only alternative_ is something totally in the face of the entire
experience both scientifcally and commonplace-ly of the world. So go
ahead, prove to me (1) and I'll prove to you (4).

Also, if you go FIRST that will establish a very important _level of
rigurousness_.

If _I_ go first, _whatever_ I say you'll just re-assert "well prove it".
If you go first, you'll almost certainly have to include lines of reasoning
such as ....

* "there are very prosaic, very, very well-observed explanations for every
effect postulated for (1) .." and

* "as 'everyone knows', reindeer can't fly, hence .." and

* "as everyone knows, we've been almost everywhere in the polar region, and .."

So go ahead, prove (1) to me, that'll establish a level of rigurousness,
where I can essentially parrot your argument/proof back inserting relevant
points for (4) - so there'll be no chance of you (or Evan!) (or Greg!)
disputing the level of rigurousness.

Or alternately (as you prefer) prove (1) to me and I'll just endlessly pick
holes in the "proof" -- demonstrating the equal futility I would face in
'proving' (4).

(AND AGAIN, as I said to Greg, please remember that I totally agree there
is a "slight chance" that both santa and the 'poof'-er exist .. OK?)
(FWIW, do you agree there is a slight chance that santa exists ?? <: )

damn !

___________________
jpm@tweb.com

I can't complain, but sometimes I still do!
- Joe Walsh