"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:54:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:55:40 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
m...
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:51:54 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


I've never said that the construction of a new school, or any other
good news, proves 'the plan' to be a good one. You have been
continuously critical of 'the plan', but, when asked for your ideas
you begged off with something about pigs (as I recall).

I can't provide real ideas because I don't know what other resources
are
available for us to use.

Yet that simple fact hasn't stopped you in the past from offering
critiques of our president's policies, and of our progress and
motives.


Neither do you. Neither of us works for the CIA or
the diplomatic services. People in those organizations certainly have
thoughts about other methods of kicking the jambs out from under "the
enemy", and it's likely that some of those ideas would work.

But since you don't know what they are, you can't assume that they
exist, and then use these unknowns as an alternative to what's
currently being done.


Meanwhile, you can be 100% sure that Bush was given other options and
chose
to ignore them because the macho solution was the one that suited his
personal needs.

There are very few things in life that you can be 100% certain of.

Dave

On the news, I sometimes hear of people shot in the head, and are in
satisfactory condition at a local hospital. Does the fact that I don't
know
how doctors arranged that miracle mean that their techniques don't
exist?

Without all the facts, you can't know for sure how the patient was
treated, or the nature of their wound.

You are applying another form of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam. You can't
prove something is false, therefore it must be true.

Dave


Really? Without all the facts? If you're shot in the head and you're in
good
shape, it wasn't due to a couple of aspirin.

You can make that assumption with a fair degree of probability there.
But beyond that, and you are only guessing.


But, your comment does not address the question I
asked:

If someone uses a skill without my also being proficient in it, does their
skill cease to exist?

Of course not. But you lose the necessary credibility to comment on it
accurately.



I'll help you he If (to pick a number) there are 50
people at the CIA who are a high level of confidence in their ability to
achieve our aims covertly and without embarrassing this country, but you
and
I don't know how they're going to do it, does that mean their ideas are
worthless?

No, but if we don't know what those ideas were or even how many were
given, we are still only guessing as to how many or even if any of
them stood the slimmest chance of success.


I'm asking because you keep saying I don't have any concrete ideas. I'm
pointing out that it doesn't matter. Someone does. And no, I can't prove
it,
but you can't disprove it.

You need to look up the logical fallacy "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam"

Here, I'll do it for you:

http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/Willia...sec-web.htm#10

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html


Dave


So, after all this, are you saying you don't think a single person in
Washington presented a workable, covert idea to your leader?