On Tue, June 20, 2006 7:54 pm, jdow said: > From: "Sean" <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cough, Sean, you should realize it was painfully obvious you were > trying to impeach the evidence based on a loose connection to the > father of BG. That is an open invitation to readers to make the > logical fallacy on their own part. > Joanne, The website in question is full of opinion, and makes it quite clear that it is not legal advice. As such, it doesn't hurt to take a look at who is giving those opinions. In fact it wasn't even me who bothered, rather another reader who sent me an email mentioning the connection. I thought it was interesting and posted the information without comment. I did not state any conclusions or make any statements, therefore it would be near impossible to make a logical fallacy :oP I still think it is interesting information and perhaps it will inspire someone to look closer and find other interesting information. Anyway, the fact that you and others read my email and made a logical fallacy on your own part is up to you to deal with. It was rather comical that someone tried to claim the fallacy was mine. Sean
