Path: news.cambrium.nl!textnews.cambrium.nl!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!209.197.12.246.MISMATCH!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!209.197.12.242.MISMATCH!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196.98.152.MISMATCH!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.posted.oncallinternetservices!news.posted.oncallinternetservices.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 20:23:18 -0600
From: Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory,sci.logic,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Fitch's paradox and OWA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:23:16 -0800
Message-ID: <t2nqj5hu4jpbqbm8lac49d76ec7sedfc42@4ax.com>
References: <see-2FC5E8.17163231122009@mail.eternal-september.org> <a3f061ed-3838-4be9-b73a-836141dc640f@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> 	<Barbara-893E3F.10082301012010@mail.eternal-september.org> 	<aEa%m.273$Mv3.262@newsfe05.iad> <17e8ec70-caf8-4177-8e04-da413070d540@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> 	<Jbb%m.281$Mv3.23@newsfe05.iad> <37b01b4f-e2cc-4369-bb8b-e7d105de0e25@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> <fYb%m.285$Mv3.94@newsfe05.iad>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 24
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.181.25.30
X-Trace: sv3-qbuwNqmCxyW050kOBpIlCe8+Ukx8U7shexAEQBHam6ghkMfJQYKVsV0zC91tTkhfWjp9GQZpYmutHeD!mwrtsOcXhplaBMjLq9f9Wiji38Eo0Dqj43IFixvVIz0cMdrOJiPRZkNuBOpMa7alaEPg8u4JCUcJ!zsGIT/cTq1AFMro0dhrfVsv/
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ocis.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Xref:  news.cambrium.nl sci.logic:158591 comp.databases.theory:38092

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:10:33 -0700, Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>Marshall wrote:

[snip]

>> There is simply no issue here to respond to. Everything you've
>> said here is either false or else it's the same as the conclusion
>> you're trying to establish.
>
>Great "refute" you seem to have had here! Among "everything" I've said here
>are a) and b). Why do you think they're false? Or you just said so out of the
>habit of saying things with no back-up reasons?
>
>Btw, usually "conclusion" is "the same" thing as what one would be "trying to
>establish". You seemed to be surprise of that. Why?

     I am impressed with the speed that you showed yourself a fool
worthy of killfiling.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko