Why does everyone disparage the unicorns?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025793/The-horned-deer-solve-mystery-unicorn.html
Which evidence is more credible?
Alain Sepeda wrote:
>first of all if I prepare an NiH-Bomb to destroy texas and saudi arabia,
>I have no incentive to prove i'm
first of all if I prepare an NiH-Bomb to destroy texas and saudi arabia,
I have no incentive to prove i'm right...
the opposite, I will try to maintain doubt not to frighten the chicken
before the lunch.
I just wait the bomb to work, and the client to pay when Texas is vitrified.
Second if I'm th
What is not understood by many people is that when you make incredible
claims it is up to the person making claims to show the claims are true and
it is not up to everybody else to prove the claims are not true.
Do you think if I announce a press conference about the unicorn in my
basement I would
not giving any hint about why it is of no interest ?
if they have data that it is a scam, it could be easy to spread them, even
indirectly...
maybe is it rather that, before doing any research they decide it does not
need research, nor proof of scam, nor denial, nor communication...
seems the mos
So Alain is not the most logical explanation that media, power organization
of different kinds, everybody in the knowing just did their research and
determine pretty quickly that Rossi's story was not worthwhile of their
attention?
G
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote:
> just to
just to add a metaphor to the reasoning :
imagine that someone present discussable, but credible, proofs of the
following facts, spread on internet :
- an economic 50MT H bomb in Saudi arabia, iran, texas, canada
- a neutron bomb on Durban summit
- economic 9/11 style terrorist attack on all ene
6 matches
Mail list logo
