On 2/14/2012 5:09 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 2/14/2012 12:48 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:

Well - we never disagreed on the value of science. I'm only
challenging the use of the term "scientific" as thrown about here.

I can only speak to the extent of my participation in this thread, but
I'll certainly try to see your point ...

But first point me to where the term "scientific", and/or an attempt
at a definition, was "thrown about" in this thread before you brought
the term up?

Found it. I was responding to a post from Han. Here it is...
Han wrote:
wrote in
:

The science is on my side!

That's a given. Whether "you" are on the side of science is the
question. For some of the set of "you" that is doubtful. Karl is at
least one who is on the side of science.

~ First:

That is neither the term "scientific" to which you specifically took
exception, nor an attempt at a definition thereof. See yours above with
regard to challenging the specific word, to the point of putting it in
quotes.

~ Second:

Han took the quote entirely out of context, and by doing so left out the
humor/joke completely.

Here is the quote in context:

On 2/14/2012 9:57 AM, Swingman wrote:

I simply do not recall a "cold front" ever being the cause, but hey,
it wouldn't be the first time I wore shorts and t-shirt in 30 degree
weather without noticing the cold.

... but that STILL doesn't explain why, drumroll:

The _science_ is on _my_ side!

g,d &r

IOW ... it OBVIOUSLY was NOT meant to be taken seriously.

But understandable that, absent the context, you did.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop