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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (201408)	9/10/2004 10:56:53 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574091

Well, it fits the technique I explained for getting to the truth when you have second hand evidence. The title of the concept does not change the point. No it doesn't change the point but using the correct titles does help us get to the point so it can be evaluated. Whatever title is used I have already responded to the substantive point. " In any case how does empathy, sympathy or any other athy change the fact that reliable non-biased information about the events in question is almost non-existent? Yes one can peace together the fact and analyze the possibilities but the known facts are too slim to come up with anything more than an educated guess, and the educated guesses of reasonable people can disagree about this and about other issues." Message 20511410 " It's true that a consistent and plausible explanation does not guarantee that the explanation is the real and absolute truth, but the process does let you weed out most of the falsepaths. There is more than one plausible explanation for several of the contested events. Apparently your contention is that all of the swift boat vets statements have been thoroughly weeded out and confirmed as false paths. I don't agree." Message 20511469