Re: Larry Athy and His Logical Analyses.

"Larry Athy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2003, 11:29am (CST+6), JMB posted here what appears to be
> a claim that McManus is stupid.
> ====================
> I had written: ++ Yes indeed!! He told me that he did not disagree with
> anything in my paper; however, he was not qualified to pass judgement on
> the statistics and thus could not pass judgement on the conclusions. ++
> ---------
> ~~ That is certainly not what he told me. He said he was not convinced
> by any of your arguments, and that he would have made that clear to you
> at the time. Given a choice, I know you to be dishonest, and I have no
> such experience with McManus, so I'll take his word over yours. ~~
> ------- 
> +++  What McManus told JMB means the same thing as what McManus told me.
> -  Since McManus did not understand the statistical part of my paper, he
> could not possibly be convinced by any of my arguments.
> -  If JMB is suggesting that McManus did not understand my statistics
> but had concluded that my paper was wrong then he is suggesting that
> McManus is as stupid as JMB is.  I do not think that at all. +++

You do realise that the statistics only make a small part of your paper.
There are the assumptions that you made too, such as your ideas of
conventional reading, and your ideas that the consonants were crerated
first, despite all the evidence to the contrary.  Then there is the dating
you suggest, despite many of the BI-1 corpus are scholastic and are very
modern.  All these things can be shown to be wrong with your paper without
having to look at the statistics.

>         Regards,  Larry Athy, P.E.
>
>
>
>

-- 
John Byrne
www.iol.ie/~archaeology
To email me use the feedback form on the website.
The address attached to this post is just a spam trap.