Re: Astronomers pinpoint the moment Ansel Adams clicked the shutter
- From: ASAAR <caught@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 01:21:32 -0400
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:20:22 -0700, William Graham wrote:
> >>> "Wet British soil"? If it's clichés you want, perhaps the rain dripping
> >>> from our bowlers makes the stones difficult to see, especially when
> >>> holding a cup of tea in a pea-souper.
> >>
> >> And, furthermore, even if you are right, and the "chalk" upon which it is
> >> built precludes the fact that it may have settled, then why haven't the
> >> many
> >> (and there have been many) "experts" that I have spoken to about this
> >> pointed it out to me? They haven't, because they have never thought about
> >> it
> >> before. Which has told me something about their ability to reason, and
> >> has
> >> destroyed their creditability with me. IOW, even if I am wrong, in a very
> >> real sense, I am right.....It is not wrong to require a certain minimum
> >> amount of intellectual honesty from those who set themselves up as
> >> authority.
> >
> > Good grief. You assume that if someone hasn't thought about or
> > considered the subsurface chalk, then they are not intellectually
> > honest? This tells me more about your ability to reason than
> > theirs. Or rather, it's confirmation.
> >
> Did I say that? - I thought I said that they never mentioned that it was
> built on an immoveable base, and never pointed it out to me before. So, it
> was reasonable to assume that either it isn't built on an immovable base, or
> they didn't know that it is. Why am I having so much trouble getting you to
> understand me? - Or is it just that your trollish nature doesn't want to
> understand? Perhaps you are just in an argumentative mood. Is it my
> conservative nature that disturbs you? In any case, my discussion of this
> subject with you is now over.
I understood you perfectly and your words were clear. For them
(the "experts") to have been intellectually dishonest you'd have to
offer evidence that they were aware of the significance of a chalk
base and tried to hide that knowledge. In fact (in a followup) you
indicated that you weren't aware of the chalk base. But you aren't
willing to concede that others might also have not thought of that,
assuming that they even knew of the chalk and its properties. I
understand you all too well and don't associate you with
conservatives. At least not the honorable ones I'm aware of such as
Wm. F. Buckley, Patrick Moynihan (a mix of liberal and conservative,
but more of the latter), ex-POW McCain, a congressman from NY (I've
momentarily forgotten his name, but before that he was a pro
quarterback) and others. You apparently aren't stupid, realizing
now the mistake you made. But to add to a poor ability to reason,
since you rise up in a defensive huff and say the discussion is
over, you've shown intellectual dishonesty as well. You might try
looking up the definition of "troll" since you apparently haven't a
clue.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: Astronomers pinpoint the moment Ansel Adams clicked the shutter
- Next by Date: Re: Wowie Zowie, flipping amazing
- Previous by thread: Re: Astronomers pinpoint the moment Ansel Adams clicked the shutter
- Next by thread: Re: Astronomers pinpoint the moment Ansel Adams clicked the shutter
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
