To: Maurice Winn who wrote (16564 ) 4/6/2007 2:04:35 AM From: elmatador Respond to of 217901 Wrong again! Forget pseudo-science. You make a statement. Then you consistently find arguments to empower your case. The more arguments you find that builds your case, the closer you are to truth. In short, the more power your statement has. TJ's statement, that Gold is going to replace paper-money, works this way I am teaching, above, because you don't know it. And I'm serioulsy doubting you have the capacity to grasp the concept. To counter argue TJ, or anyone else for that matter, you don't need to go to physics. Just try to destroy his case by counter arguing him, with your own statement. So far his case still stands in the lapse of time 2001 - 2007. I'm not saying it will stand in 2017, but again, to serve his purpose, his case need only to survive until he cash in on it. Now compare with your case: You bet your underwear on a piece of technology? When we know, for a fact, that technologies are superseded by better, cheaper technologies at a fast and faster rate? But let me step back here a bit to destroy your predictability thing. You rise from a certain time in history when the science Deus ex machina held youngster and awe. I touched that when I was explaining why young people today embrace IT while in your era they embrace nuclear technology. You need to go back to where you raise to prove your point, even though we know that those scientific "proofs" are totally and absolutely irrelevant to deal with today's world. I'm trying here to discover how comes, I have been constantly moving with the world and how comes some people calcify in what was important by the time they were 18 years old.