>Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 19:38:14 -0500
>From: "Rick Barnes" <rascal@scrtc.com>
>Subject: DML: RE: "State of Fear" - Creighton & Moore
>
>I would say Creighton is objective as he has hundreds of footnotes
>throughout his book proving his points, whereas Moore's ridiculous claims
>were pathetically easy to refute, no proof at all. Moore lied, (and I am
>NOT a Republican). Creighton carefully researched and has mountains of
>proof.
>
>I take truth to be so with proof, not heresay. If you cannot distinguish
>those differences, its no wonder you stay in lurk.
>
>Rascal
I'm not familiar with the Creighton piece and haven't even bothered
listening to Moore, but on thing I would like to mention is that it's not
the absence of proof that is a problem sometimes. It's the omission of any
proof of another theory that's the problem. Many believed Michael Moore's
"documentary" because of countless newsclips that served as "Proof" but
failed to acknowledge that he totally ignored anything that didn't support
him. Just my $.02.
Zach
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 01 2005 - 12:50:23 EDT