So, you have trouble with people who maintain that 2 + 2 = 4? That's not much of an argument. You are confusing being Open Minded with having an empty mind. Your objective is to keep an infeasible "option" open in the face of all the contrary evidence. For what conceivable purpose? Certainly not to get at the truth, because you find the facts offensive to your hypothesis.
So, you have trouble with people who maintain that 2+ 2 =4. That is not much of an argument.
Come one, DRD. You can do a billion times better than that. your: So-statement exemplifies what I said: closed mindedness leads to underestimation.
Your second mistake is that, because there is an appearance and you can draw inferences, that somehow equals to something like mathematical assurance, when it is only your perception playing a game on you, leading you into opinion, yet you fail to see it.
Your third mistake is: "Certainly not to get at the truth". So certain you are? It is actually a call to authority. Your own. And hence, a logical fallacy.
Fourth mistake: Truth: I refer you to the bible-forum. there seems to be a nice Pilatian discussion on truth. .
Fifth mistake: then what is my hypothesis? There is none. So, actually, I admit to being wrong. Closed mindedness, I stated, leads to under estimation. That is wrong. At least partly. It also leads to overestimation.
So, you've opened my mind to who you really are. Thanks, mate!
Actually you do have trouble with people who maintain that 2 + 2 = 4. You just deny that, in principle, we can ever know that 2 + 2 = 4. Can't accept it. Must keep an "open mind." You cannot have a mind so open (and empty) that the bats fly in and out.
No. Knowing what one is talking about leads to realistic estimation. And you don't know much. All your argument here is to deny the valid points I made about the identification of that photo. To the extent that they tell against my argument, they blow your argument completely out of the water, so you don't get much victory.
Did you not notice that I was always qualifying by saying "if that is what it was"? I have an open mind---but not to nonsense. It sill could have been the stupid helicopter (though I doubt it).
So, you have trouble with people who maintain that 2 + 2 = 4? That's not much of an argument. You are confusing being Open Minded with having an empty mind. Your objective is to keep an infeasible "option" open in the face of all the contrary evidence. For what conceivable purpose? Certainly not to get at the truth, because you find the facts offensive to your hypothesis.
Come one, DRD. You can do a billion times better than that. your: So-statement exemplifies what I said: closed mindedness leads to underestimation.
Your second mistake is that, because there is an appearance and you can draw inferences, that somehow equals to something like mathematical assurance, when it is only your perception playing a game on you, leading you into opinion, yet you fail to see it.
Your third mistake is: "Certainly not to get at the truth". So certain you are? It is actually a call to authority. Your own. And hence, a logical fallacy.
Fourth mistake: Truth: I refer you to the bible-forum. there seems to be a nice Pilatian discussion on truth. .
Fifth mistake: then what is my hypothesis? There is none. So, actually, I admit to being wrong. Closed mindedness, I stated, leads to under estimation. That is wrong. At least partly. It also leads to overestimation.
So, you've opened my mind to who you really are. Thanks, mate!
Actually you do have trouble with people who maintain that 2 + 2 = 4. You just deny that, in principle, we can ever know that 2 + 2 = 4. Can't accept it. Must keep an "open mind." You cannot have a mind so open (and empty) that the bats fly in and out.
No. Knowing what one is talking about leads to realistic estimation. And you don't know much. All your argument here is to deny the valid points I made about the identification of that photo. To the extent that they tell against my argument, they blow your argument completely out of the water, so you don't get much victory.
Did you not notice that I was always qualifying by saying "if that is what it was"? I have an open mind---but not to nonsense. It sill could have been the stupid helicopter (though I doubt it).