Wayne, I got close on one out of two. Hate to risk that record but ESTP for you? Why funny? It was clear to me that Indi and Ode have strong but different personalities. Ode is a strong intuitive and Indi needs hard facts. Indi will never be satisfied with intuitive reasoning and Ode sees no need for proving physics once his intuition is satisfied. Neither personality is in general better than the other. Ode would excel where decisions need to be made quickly with a minimal amount of information. But you wouldn't necessarily want Ode designing the launch and targeting circuitry for a nuclear ICBM where the slightest error could cause Armageddon. You would want Indi for that job. But I don't see them ever agreeing on the subject at hand. - Steve N
-----Original Message----- From: Wayne Fugitt [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 12:28 PM To: [email protected] Subject: CS>blue moon Types, ?? Evening Steve, At 12:21 PM 10/18/2008, you wrote: Interesting message and almost funny. >I apologize iin advance for getting in this issue but are you familiar >with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MTBI)? While you cannot determine >someones personality type from postings you can get some indications. >Indi, I would guess you as something close to an ISTJ and Ode closer to >an INTP. Google the type or MBTI and you will get more info than you >want. Does it cost more to get my type ? I don't even care. I know which "Rooster can pull a Wagon, Before I hitch him up". That is all that matters, ........ most of the time. Wayne ================================ > The point I want to make is not your type but to point out that you >both have different personalities that color your view of the world. >As do I and every member of this list. We each will look at what Ode >has done and make our own evaluation of the methods and results >independently. I appreciate the information Ode has provided since it >is information I would not have otherwise. >You, Ode and I each have different standards for determining what is >acceptable 'proof' but that does not make any others standard >unacceptable as a criteria. You can use your criteria without insisting >that everyone else use it too. The problem with hard scientific proof >is that is that such proof is often unachievable and that lack of such >proof if required prevents release of otherwise useful information. >Ode provided his information and test methodology and I think that is >sufficient for one to understand and evaluate the data. > - Steve N > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Indi <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] <[email protected]> >Sent: Sat Oct 18 08:40:18 2008 >Subject: Re: CS>blue moons revisited > > > >You'd probably want to send it to a lab. Around three hundred dollars >for true answers. I realize it isn't cheap (or even affordable for most of us). >A good chemical analysis is not something an untrained person can do at home. >People get degrees in chemistry, you know. :) > >As I've said before, my point is speaking in ABSOLUTES is irresponsible >when your "testing" is so rudimentary. >"Feelings", anecdotal evidence, belief, etc do not disprove this point >one bit. >Sorry if that gvets people's dander up, but I am not about to abandon >all principles of critical thinking just because some here want to make >unsubstantiated claims. Data is data. Either one has it or one doesn't. >:) > >indi > > >On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:45:05PM +1030, Neville wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Indi" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 2:53 AM > > Subject: Re: CS>blue moons revisited > > > > > > Quote: > > [armed with only an EC meter and a laser pointer, for the simple > > reason that those devices are not enough to *prove* your claims (in > > scientific terms).] > > > > In the absence of suitable laboratory testing equipment, in the > > home, which is where most users involved with EICS are, perhaps you > > could steer me in the direction of a more accurate, better or more > > suitable instrument so that I may be able to assess my EICS in a > > more acceptable and precise manner. I for one would certainly be > > most grateful in the knowledge that there are other instruments > > available, other than EC meters etc, which are available and > > affordable over the counter to everyone in their homes, but I don't > > know what is available to me, other than the instrument I currently > > use. If you know something I don't then I would be humbly grateful > > if you would pass it on, but it must be affordable and available > > over the counter to everyone who is involved with EICS..........in their own homes. > > > > It's fine for those who may be scientifically minded and/or have > > access to more precise instruments, but I think most EICS users are > > just plain ordinary folk using equipment that is affordable and readily available. > > Tell me what else I can use that fits the above criteria and I'll go > > out and get one, but remember, it must fit the above criteria so > > that perhaps we can all go out and get one. > > > > N. > > > > > > -- > > The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. > > > > Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: > <http://silverlist.org>http://silverlist.org > > > > To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > > > Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] > > > > The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down... > > > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > > > >
