Date: Tue May 27 1997 - 10:24:45 EDT
uh oh. ken hit one hot button before i got to washing off the grease.
my phraseology, indeed quoted by ken himself, namely <<if just one of the
antagonists has the necessary repertoire for it to seem simple, easy and clear
and has an understanding that conforms to the intent of the author>> has been
totally ignored in ken's allegations regarding my stated views. i said nothing
about it's being regarded as clear other than to the one qualified to see it
clearly. general and special relativity will have been clear to einstein
whether anyone else on earth ever understood it or not. my wording was loaded
in advance against almost 100% of ken's critique by the phraseology <<and has
an understanding that conforms to the intent of the author>>, for that was the
posited condition of the scenario i constructed here.
bearded bill of asheville <email@example.com>
unca not having approved either whom or thereof.
p.s. argument can be taken (the rich etymology of argentum 'silver') simply,
historically to mean clarification.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:17 EDT