--- In [email protected], anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > I just helped circulate that in another post. > > > > > > It is ambiguous, but I am not sure which slant was meant. The "by > > > definition" "proof" isn't definative IMO. It needs clarification by > > > Wilson -- which I assume he will provide today. > > > > > > > I assume that he spoke int he same way as people say "the minute this > > happened, this was so..." > > I assume Wilson meant this too. But lets try something revolutionary > -- Lets ask him. Or let him clarify it. Before we fanatatically > declare a particular interpretation as 100% certain as to what he meant. > > I can think of other reasonable interpretations.
Perhaps one of these others is the correct one, but since you ALSO thought that this was what he meant, why did you quote an article that argued the alternate point-of-view as though it was more valid than what you now say you already thought was the most likely interpretation? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
