On 8/30/06, Roberto Gordo Saez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I strongly disagree with your arguments. It looks that we have opposite way of thinking, so I will not reply to them, it is going to nowhere. Don't worry, as I said, I won't continue searching for this.
When conversations go nowhere, it's often because people are not understanding what the other is saying. In this case, I see one rather obvious issue (there may be others): Steve Langasek has said, in essence "When A says X, and we have no evidence to the contrary, we believe A". Your objection, in essence seems to be "We should not believe X when we have no evidence that X is true." It seems to me that both of these statements are reasonable, and that neither refutes the other. This could turn into a "standards of evidence" discussion, but it currently does not taste like that. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
