Your latest remarks: https://mb.boardhost.com/ReligionAndEthics/msg/1713561298.html
"Fixated on Facts" Sir Real here, eager to hear what pertinent facts you have to offer.
So far, unevidenced claims are all I've heard from you. Don't let the fact of this dialogue's having dropped off page 1 stop you -- there's always time for facts and I am more than happy to make room for some. So provide some.
YOU: "We even did things manually in the 70's that COULD have been done with the LIMITED technologies they had then. Because of those LIMITATIONS."
Oh? Well how about you provide an example or two of such "things"? What limited technologies were available then that were rejected specifically because of their limitations? Just what were those limitations that were to blame for producers' declining to take the higher tech path? Let's have the facts.
YOU: "Just because it COULD have been done with technology does not mean that it was the best way to do it AT THE TIME."
So what do you know about it? Historically speaking, just how common an occurrence has it been that the "old way" was able to stave off implementation of the higher tech way for more than a fleetingly negligible period of time, if at all? Let's have the facts.
You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, and when to call a bluff.
Message Thread
« Back to index