You still don't want to see the facts.
In real life, inferring from data works, far more often than not.Really? So Clinton was right and had "The Truth"?
Ah, once again, you fall into the trap of assuming that your opinions are as valid data points as reproducable experiments. Sorry, your mind is no where near stable enough to make that claim.
It yields results that in turn yield results, that in turn get things done.That depends upon what your "data" is. I notice you are unable to answer my question as to whether Clinton had "The Truth". He seemed to meet all your criteria, yet you don't seem to like the guy. Wouldn't that make you opposed to "The Truth"?
Why can't you answer the question?
Maybe for you everything is a coin toss.And this is one of the reasons why I keep pointing out that your "Truth" is nothing more than your opinions. You can't even tell an analogy from the real thing. If you have that much trouble with simple analogies, I can only imagine the trouble you'll have with real life.
Which is probably why you can't answer my question about Clinton.
With this atttude, you're unlikely to learn anything useful. I wonder how you manage to hold a job. Are you a PHB or an academic or something? Surely you're not someone who gets things done, except perhaps on planet Brandioch. Why, I wouldn't trust you to change a light bulb. You'd probably flip a coin a dozen times to determine if it needs changing, and then decide the light bulb doesn't exist.Like I said. It was an analogy and you aren't capable of telling the difference.
Well, I'm off for a few days to get some stuff done away from my computers.Translation: "I'm running and hiding so I won't have to answer your questions and I hope this topic will scroll."
