Zell, Chris <[email protected]> wrote: ** > Defective analogy. The cars for sale are real and functional, aren't > they? Even if the business is dishonest. >
It is even more defective than that. You would have to compare it to a veterinarian who uses Stroud's reference book. Would you not take his advice for how to treat your canary because Stroud was a homicidal lunatic? That would be irrational. To say the least. See: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html As I remarked here, I would not do business with Rossi. I would not buy so much as nail clipper from him. However, that has no bearing on the scientific validity of his claims. That has been established three ways: 1. Tests on his device. Despite the handwaving and nonsense published here by Yugo and others, these tests are irrefutable. There is not slightest chance of fraud. 2. Independent tests by Ampenergo and others. 3. Independent replication by Defkalion. You can't ask for better proof. I mean that literally: there is no such thing as better proof. Only more of the same. Yugo apparently wrote: > So, if I understand you correctly, if a car dealership had been convicted > of fraud in two major cases over the years, that would be your choice of a > source for a used car? > This is so misguided . . . Yugo has no concept of separating a person from a claim. I am soooo glad I put her on my auto-delete list! - Jed
