On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, I was asking simple questions about techniques. Discussions between > people on a paper, results, etc. depend on agreement on techniques for > evaluation. I asked whether you agreed on a few essential techniques of > empirical investigation.
No, you were rambling on with nonsense, failing to address a single argument in the Higg's paper. > That's not the point being argued. You see, all but a few people understand > that money is a placeholder; it is a social construct. Numbers in a > computer or pieces of paper with dead presidents on them have meaning only > within a society. Sophistry. Money can be converted to gold, and gold has value in every society. You are just trying to rationalize taking wealth from others because you think you know how to spend it better than they do. > Thus, if you are a member of this society, you play by its rules. America has a long history of forcing things on others. That does not make it right or good. > But, your arguments for radical individualism are about as sensible as > someone arguing that people are just a construct, all that exist are quarks, > leptons, and all the particles that transmit the forces. What an incredibly egotistical statement. Your egotism never ceases to amaze and amuse me. Let's just throw out all moral rights of a person to keep what is theirs because Dan doesn't like them, and for good measure, let's call John insensible because he thinks he has a right to his wealth and posessions. Hilarious! I don't know if I can read any more of your posts I am laughing so hard! _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
