Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (59017)	11/26/2002 7:08:36 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi CobaltBlue; Re: "Lawyers use inductive reasoning. We read between lines, see the things that are unsaid as well as the things that are said. Sherlock Holmes used inductive reasoning when he solved the mystery of the dog that didn't bark." This may all be true, but the fact is that despite all your legal education you were still quite wrong about the merchant marine. I read between the lines, you did not. Re: "An engineer may see 1000 black ravens, but won't venture to opine that ravens are black." This is completely untrue. As it turns out, it does form the gist of a famous joke, available in many forms, which I shall now repeat (the first one I googled): A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer were travelling through Scotland when they saw a black sheep through the window of the train. "Aha," says the engineer, "I see that Scottish sheep are black." "Hmm," says the physicist, "You mean that some Scottish sheep are black." "No," says the mathematician, "All we know is that there is at least one sheep in Scotland, and that at least one side of that one sheep is black!" maths.warwick.ac.uk Suffice it to say that you, reading between the lines, concluded that Iraq had admitted that they have WMDs. I, reading between the same lines, concluded that a single Iraqi general (not "Iraq") had not made such an admission, but instead was simply stating that WMDs were used in the past, and that there was nothing immoral about their use. As far as our respective abilities to read between the lines, I let our histories stand next to one another, and can only smile. -- Carl