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).
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).