On 9 Sep 2003 23:37:24 -0700, mikegordge@no-spam (Michael Gordge)
wrote:
>
>Cliff signs off with
>
>>
>> The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
>> that the conspiracy is working.
>
>What is "evidence" given that YOU claim facts can never be facts?
>
Well in a court of law, evidence is given by both sides. In many cases
it is contradictory. Therefore it cannot be facts, either by your
definition or by mine.
Cheers,
Cliff
--
The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working.
In article <idutlv4ussj9oeva1g81fdlm0pt7pim1ft@no-spam>, enkidu@no-spam wrote:
>On 9 Sep 2003 23:37:24 -0700, mikegordge@no-spam (Michael Gordge)
>wrote:
>>
>>Cliff signs off with
>>> The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
>>> that the conspiracy is working.
>>What is "evidence" given that YOU claim facts can never be facts?
>Well in a court of law, evidence is given by both sides. In many cases
>it is contradictory. Therefore it cannot be facts, either by your
>definition or by mine.
Indeed. The number of provable facts are very few. Most opinions rely more on
assumptions/"world views" (which many people consider facts :) ). These are,
however, not facts (by definition) so any hypothesis based on them fails
automatically.
Bruce
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Oook !
NOTE remove the not_ from the address to reply. NO SPAM !
bruce.sinclair@no-spam (Bruce Sinclair) wrote in message news:<igP7b.479$tv1.53794@no-spam>...
> In article <idutlv4ussj9oeva1g81fdlm0pt7pim1ft@no-spam>, enkidu@no-spam wrote:
> >On 9 Sep 2003 23:37:24 -0700, mikegordge@no-spam (Michael Gordge)
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>Cliff signs off with
>
> >>> The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
> >>> that the conspiracy is working.
> >>What is "evidence" given that YOU claim facts can never be facts?
> >Well in a court of law, evidence is given by both sides. In many cases
> >it is contradictory. Therefore it cannot be facts, either by your
> >definition or by mine.
>
> Indeed. The number of provable facts are very few.
Fact is just another name for reality and does NOT need "proving",
what is real (fact) is real (fact) and is independant of man's mind.
Facts are facts regardless and totally independant of man's mind, eg
two planes were deliberately flown into two towers in New York two
years ago, regardless of what any man thinks, that is a fact.
Most opinions rely more on
> assumptions/"world views" (which many people consider facts :) ). These are,
> however, not facts (by definition) so any hypothesis based on them fails
> automatically.
Fuck, some people talk a lot of crap, give an example of what you mean
Bruce, because I have no idea what you are trying to say. Oh I think I
understand, you mean, like, when you parasitical socialists say tax is
not theft, you are only expressing a "world view" and not a fact?
mmmmm that makes sense.
bruce.sinclair@no-spam (Bruce Sinclair) wrote in message news:<igP7b.479$tv1.53794@no-spam>...
> In article <idutlv4ussj9oeva1g81fdlm0pt7pim1ft@no-spam>, enkidu@no-spam wrote:
> >On 9 Sep 2003 23:37:24 -0700, mikegordge@no-spam (Michael Gordge)
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>Cliff signs off with
>
> >>> The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
> >>> that the conspiracy is working.
> >>What is "evidence" given that YOU claim facts can never be facts?
> >Well in a court of law, evidence is given by both sides. In many cases
> >it is contradictory. Therefore it cannot be facts, either by your
> >definition or by mine.
>
> Indeed. The number of provable facts are very few.
Fact is just another name for reality and does NOT need "proving",
what is real (fact) is real (fact) and is independant of man's mind.
Facts are facts regardless and totally independant of man's mind, eg
two planes were deliberately flown into two towers in New York two
years ago, regardless of what any man thinks, that is a fact.
Most opinions rely more on
> assumptions/"world views" (which many people consider facts :) ). These are,
> however, not facts (by definition) so any hypothesis based on them fails
> automatically.
Fuck, some people talk a lot of crap, give an example of what you mean
Bruce, because I have no idea what you are trying to say. Oh I think I
understand, you mean, like, when you parasitical socialists say tax is
not theft, you are only expressing a "world view" and not a fact?
mmmmm that makes sense.
