Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- From: claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 16 Dec 2006 14:04:01 -0800
Lee Olsen wrote:
claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
So, you admit that you refuse to define it?
Aha, so you do admit there is actually something to define?
Big switch from:
Message-ID: <1165870560.709149.322460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
There is no such thing as negative evidence retard.
Feel like retracting that foolish statement yet? You must feel very
lonely and inadequate not understanding terms the rest of the world
takes for granted.
You have no business pretending to participate in a scientific
discussion.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- References:
- Negative Evidence: Lee's version of vagueness
- From: claudiusdenk
- Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- From: claudiusdenk
- Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- From: Lee Olsen
- Negative Evidence: Lee's version of vagueness
- Prev by Date: Re: Some people never learn (was re: Fun on PalAnth-L.)
- Next by Date: Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- Previous by thread: Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- Next by thread: Re: Negative Evidence: 50 million Google hits can't be wrong
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
