Re: Michael Clark, would you like to make a retraction?

On Feb 10, 8:44 pm, "Makouli" <m...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Lee Olsen" <paleoc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:b7027f3d-0342-43d2-a6f5-91586b84ebf8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 10, 8:14 pm, claudiusd...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Oh, so you're saying that his excuse for not having a hypothesis is
that, IYO, I don't have one. One more question. If he (and by
implication conventional theorists) has a hypothesis then why does he
need an excuse?

You must have missed it, "Why are you demanding he should have a real
hypothesis when you  don't?"
You are in no position to be demanding anything.

Oh BTW, Dimmy, I don't think this qualifies as a
hypothesis:http://tinyurl.com/8fomk.  Do you?
I think your "questions" qualify you as a complete
lunatic.  Remember now, I'm laughing ~at~ you.

Maybe if you made the retraction you'd feel better about yourself and
you wouldn't feel the need to further misrepresent the state of your
knowledge.
.

Loading