At 08:15 AM 4/1/2010, Nick Palmer wrote:
ABD wrote:
<<Do the statements contradict each other? No. McKubre says that he
provided a correction. An EPRI representative says that "no
correction exists." These two statements are not in contradiction.>>
Eh? Have we fallen through the looking glass again?
One of my favorite books, in which Carroll skewers knee-jerk thinking
and habitual response to language. I read this to my eight-year-old
daughter whenever I put her to bed, maybe two or three times a week.
McKubre, I will note, did not claim, even, that the "correction" was
written. Even if it were, it could have been a single piece of paper
that was lost, so it "doesn't exist."
There is no contradiction, because there is a simple explanation that
is consistent with both statements.
Krivit, however, makes it into a contradiction, with his headline:
EPRI, Passell Contradict McKubre
Now, if the EPRI rep actually said to Krivit, "McKubre never provided
us with a correction," which Krivit did *not* report, that would be a
contradiction, and a rather stupid one. I very much doubt that this
is what was said. If it was, it was a slip and I'd expect we might
see a retraction from EPRI.
