RE: Mastropaolo's probabilities are science.

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Tue, 13 Oct 1998 18:14:03 -0700

> Thanks Kevin, you are right in pointing out the differences in 0.95 and Joseph's
>probability argument.

Joseph: Pim, you are lying again.>>

You are using ad hominems again poor Joseph.

Joseph: <<The issue is the geometry of proteins, not marbles, not rocks, not dice.>>

It's all about probabilities, something you seem to have a hard time understanding. What is your response to Kevin's excellent argument ? I have seen none. Would it not have been far more effective to show Kevin's errors ? Instead you chose to use ad hominems.
Your own actions are telling enough.

Joseph : <<If you can't tell the truth, at least lie about the correct subject.
Do you have a truth disability? If so, I'll stop.
Why can't you answer simple questions, like do you have a truth
disability or are you a Christian? You do not do well with the complex
ones.>>

Still no scientific arguments. Dear Joseph, what's wrong with you ?