Pete, Re: "So the proof must be in proving wrong my numbers."
I've got to admit, that's a pretty good strategy if you want to win an argument: just throw all the numbers you can at the other person, and let them separate the wheat from the chaff. Whatever they accept proves your point, and whatever they deny doesn't need to be acknowledged, since it was only an educated guess to begin with. It all creates a circular argument that goes on until you reach the point where the person isn't versed enough in the given subject matter to argue effectively. At that point you can claim victory by default. It's what I called the Numbers Game a few posts back.
So, as long as you insist that you are right until proven wrong, I cannot continue to argue with you. For all I know - all, some, or none of what you say has any factual backing. I'm not experienced enough to play by these rules forever, and as you say, looking through the fog of FUD is not easy. I hope you don't take it offensively, though. I'd be happy to have a facts-only discussion with you at any time.
wanna_bmw
P.S. Re: <<At least you debate the thinking and not the thinker.>> Thanks for the complement. |
