Terry Blanton wrote:
Trust but verify.
I don't get that. If you have verified, you don't need to trust. It
makes more sense to say:
Don't trust; verify.
OR
Why bother trusting if you can verify?
This was with regard to weapons reductions in the Reagan era. By that
time, both sides had excellent satellite spy systems so they implement a
treaty wherein missile solos were blown up, the top covers smashed, and
both sides could confirm the other side had done that. It was wise of
the leaders to agree to this. It was enlightened. But trust did not
enter into it -- it was based on what had become verifiable. The wisdom
was in recognizing that technology had developed enough to allow such
verification, and that it was in everyone's best interest to reduce the
number of weapons.
With regard to experimental claims, I never trust people. I only trust
instruments, and only after I have verified them by comparing them to
other instruments.
- Jed
