Re: RE: Subject: Re: [Harp-L] comb material
- To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: RE: Subject: Re: [Harp-L] comb material
- From: "Tim Moyer" <wmharps@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:01:01 -0000
- Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lima; d=yahoogroups.com; b=iZw0xuRK1WuV5RskNK4Obrn9wA4Um0A/hgilLzXbvRrTDQqjQa5ZRxwJFRCuGsMPwFaujVpjr1+ko+aosaGGu3ynQ5BrZUDybpUJwsvw+j4NMZxanTRuEdvOeRx7yDwH;
- Sender: notify@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
J Compton wrote:
> Why is the burden of proof on the "material matters" people?
> Why is the prevailing position that the material doesn't matter
> until someone proves otherwise? Why isn't it that the material
> *does* matter until someone demonstrates that it doesn't?
Very simply, because it's impossible to prove a negative. Therefore it
is incumbant on the people who believe they can tell a difference to
prove to other who believe it can't be done.
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and