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 : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (3032)	10/17/2006 2:26:20 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

1. You actually posted the "even if" later on, not in the original post. Irrelevant. 2. My dismissal (with citation from a scientist) of your absurd "even if" does in fact demolish the argument you made. It does not prove your conclusion is always wrong. But it does dispense your argument to the garbage bin. It does nothing of the sort. It does show that if you accept the study that claims contrary to the study are wrong. That a tautology that doesn't tell us anything interesting or useful. It also is effectively an argument from authority with the study, or the studies authors as the authority. Its weak because I don't accept them as that type of authority here. I don't accept anyone as that type of authority in this situation, there are to many unknowns. Its a circular argument because the larger issue we are discussing is the reliability of the study.