Re: Musings on Nasa and the Concept of Truth.

From: Dennis M. Hammes (scrawlmark_at_arvig.net)
Date: 08/09/04 

Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:23:14 GMT

Jonathan wrote:
>
> "Barbara's Cat" <cat@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1b7eb60963dded298974e@news-60.giganews.com...
> > On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 00:50:15 -0400
> > Jonathan said:
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> > > I'm certain 99.86% of Nasa [snip]
> >
> > > Seventy percent of this country [snip]
> >
> > Where in hell do you get all these numbers from?
>
> The first one is from an ivory soap commercial from years ago.

"99 and 44 one-hundreths per cent pure."
>
> The second is certainly open to argument. I heard it on CNN
> during a discussion of religion in this election. I didn't look
> into it further then, but it appears 50% is a better number.
> http://www.spiritrestoration.org/Church/Pastors%20Page/US%20demographics.htm

Or "63%," which was cited on a PBS something within the twelvemonth,
regarding church attendance at least once a year (the "mandatory"
minimum for Catholics and derivatives).
>
> But the original point that 'born-again' is a dominant belief system remains true.

Whether Buddhist, Hindu, or Dunked Christian.
  (Not that they /mean/ the same thing by it; they don't.)
  But the majority Christian are still Catholic (R + O) and
Lutheran, and they don't do the "born-again" gibber "in 'this'
life."
  And the Jewish and Shinto never had it.
>
> > Or do you just make them up as you go along.
>
> I don't believe in exact numbers, only approximations.

Sure excuses /you/ of knowing how to lay a ruler, dunnit.
  "Ich hab' dreimal abgeschnitten, und ist /noch/ zu kurz." 

-- 
-------(m+
  ~/:o)_|
The most essential gift for a good writer is
 a built-in, shock-proof, *** detector.  -- Hemingway
http://scrawlmark.org
Quantcast