Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: "tomcat" <jlavine@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Mar 2006 07:48:15 -0800
columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote:
That does not relieve you of your burden for you have made a statement,
and without backing or citation, you are stating an opinion, not fact.
How do you know this? This statement is not properly backed up by at
least 3 scientists. You have no footnotes and no bibliography. Bad,
bad, bad.
Arrogant statements of you alleged intelect does not establish your
credibility, but instead reduce the validity of your assertions.
How do you know this? This statement is not properly backed up by at
least 3 scientists. You have no footnotes and no bibliography. Bad,
bad, bad.
Your problem is called: "The Problem of Self Reference"
tomcat
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: columbiaaccidentinvestigation
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- References:
- On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: Ian Stirling
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: Brad Guth
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: Brad Guth
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: Brad Guth
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: columbiaaccidentinvestigation
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: tomcat
- Re: On the Subject of Ice
- From: columbiaaccidentinvestigation
- On the Subject of Ice
- Prev by Date: Re: North South East or West
- Next by Date: Re: On the Subject of Ice
- Previous by thread: Re: On the Subject of Ice
- Next by thread: Re: On the Subject of Ice
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|