|
Re: Anecdotes Do Not Make A Science |
I wasn't yelling, I used BOLD PRINT for emphasis. Yesterday, a newspaper ed. interviewed me about my eq hits and predictions. Ironically, he is skeptical, much like you. He was going to run a piece as filler. Follow Ups: ● Re: Anecdotes Do Not Make A Science - Skywise 16:53:13 - 7/21/2006 (39452) (1) ● Re: Anecdotes Do Not Make A Science - Cal 17:04:31 - 7/21/2006 (39453) (1) ● Re: Anecdotes Do Not Make A Science - Skywise 17:51:45 - 7/21/2006 (39455) (3) ● Re: Skywise and Chickens - cal 18:24:17 - 7/21/2006 (39459) (0) ● Re: To Anti-Chicken Man - cal 18:23:43 - 7/21/2006 (39458) (0) ● Re: To Anti-Chicken Man - cal 18:23:01 - 7/21/2006 (39456) (1) ● ad hominem - Skywise 18:46:05 - 7/21/2006 (39461) (2) ● What science are you involved in? - Glen 21:15:34 - 7/21/2006 (39465) (1) ● Re: What science are you involved in? - Skywise 00:42:33 - 7/22/2006 (39473) (1) ● Sound well rounded - Glen 12:05:08 - 7/22/2006 (39484) (0) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - cal 20:25:13 - 7/21/2006 (39463) (1) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - Skywise 00:30:37 - 7/22/2006 (39472) (1) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - Callie 10:26:32 - 7/22/2006 (39482) (2) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - Skywise 15:56:01 - 7/22/2006 (39486) (1) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - cal 17:22:43 - 7/22/2006 (39487) (1) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - Skywise 20:25:37 - 7/22/2006 (39490) (0) ● Re: P.S. Triple Posts. and Tunnel Vision - Roger Hunter 12:02:52 - 7/22/2006 (39483) (0) |
|