Thanks, Keith. I know my style is, shall we say, a little proactive at times,
and, while I did not really take your comments as a challenge, I welcomed the
opportunjity to exemplify. After all, we are writing for the bystanders too.
And in view of the hurt being inflicted on millions by the present system,
including many good Kiwis as our egalitarian society changed to one of division,
I do regard this and any other opportunities to promote Social Credit as indeed a
challenge.
Regards, John R.
>From: "Keith Wilde" <keithwilde@sympatico.ca> >Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com >To: <socialcredit@elistas.com> >Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Reply to John--again >Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:19:55 -0400 >
>John, I just re-read what I sent yesterday and see that I have to retract
part of my just-sent reply to you of this morning. I find that I did say "I look
forward to your empirical efforts", so strike my note of incredulity. You appear
to have taken it as a challenge, however, as if I were doubting that it could be
done. That was not my intent; I said it merely as an expression of interest. > >I
do reiterate, however, my notion that empirical efforts might be more
productively oriented elsewhere. No one has agreed with me on that one, so I will
have to make a greater expository
effort. As I explained yesterday, however, I have to restrain myself from it for
a couple of weeks while I attend to some personal urgencies. > >Keith > -----
Original Message ----- > From: John G Rawson > To: socialcredit@elistas.com >
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 5:21 AM > Subject: [socialcredit] Reply to Keith
Wilde X 2 > > > Having dropped a snide remark about "label thinking", it would be
unseemly for me to quibble about the precise one now applied to scientific
methodology. Provided it means testing against reality rather than pure untested
deductions, then I am happy. If I stand corrected, so be it, it does not affect
the thrust of my argument. But I do hope Keith's source is not an
anti-evolutionist "scientist" from a US mid-western college. And scientists are
regularly running tests of Einstein's work in space experiments etc. > > Anyone
who
isn't sure what we are talking about could get an excellent indication from
either of two sources: a. The US Biological Science Curriculum Studies "blue
version", "Molecules to Man", about 1970, or b. the Sherlock Holmes stories. The
first undoubtedly contained it in the first chapter of the book as a reaction to
"put downs" from physical sicentists about our "imprecise sciences"; someone else
may care to guess at Conan Doyle's motivation. > > And Keith does not have to
look forward to empirical tests, because Vic Bridger's excellent contributions
contain many examples where predictioins based on the Douglas analysis have
proved correct. But I will mention again the stagflation problem if he wishes one
scrap. > > Finally, may I bring up the totally invented story of the motorist who
went to an economist mechanic when his car stalled. Mechanic DEDUCED from the
symptoms that
the fault was certainly electrical and replaced the whole ignition system. And
the car still didn't go. So, several hundred dollars poorer, the motorist went
down the street to the Socred mechanic, who thought "Looks like an electrical
fault, but I'll check". Checking a spark plug, which had a beautiful blue spark
SUGGESTED (didn't prove) that his first hypothesis was wrong. So he took the
alternative one, that the fuel system was faulty, and behold, no fuel was
reaching the motor. So his next hypothesis was a line blockage, but being truly
(INDUCTIVE, or ..) he dipped the tank, to find it was empty, and had to ditch
that one too. Being knowledgeable, he asked the motorist if he could have been
misled by a fuel gauge permanently showing "full"? To leave out the next
hypothesis and cut the story a bit shorter, he soldered up the broken lead from
the tank unit to it and charged the
motorist about ten dollars before he went off happily. (It really was an
electrical fault, but not the one DEDUCED by the first operator.) > > Before
someone tells me modern cars have computers and different methodology, I'll
agree. But from the point of view of a typical do-it-yourself Kiwi working on the
wonderful old Chrysler Valiants formerly produced in Australasia, it is dead
accurate. > > For the first situation in it, perhaps one could substitute the
"trickle down" theory associated with the modern monetarist approach to
economics? > > John R. > >
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Looking for love? Check out XtraMSN Personals >
>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >You're
subscribed to this list with the email keithwilde@sympatico.ca >To unsubscribe,
send a
message to >socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com >For more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit > > >
>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >You're
subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com >To unsubscribe,
send a message to >socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com >For more information,
visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
