Julian Bradley wrote:
> At 22:02 16/03/2007, TW wrote:
>
>> Not all discussion needs a conclusion, but could anyone summarise what
>> has changed as a result of this thread...
>
> FWIW a bunch of doctors (and others) have shown that they can be
> motivated to think and write about things other than computers, money
> and the many failings of the Rt Hon Patricia blew it, not that any of
> those things are unimportant.
>
> Something of a reading list has been created (v.i.) - even if it seems
> unlikely that any of us will read it all.
>
> We've all learnt a little more about each other, and perhaps about the
> definitions of scientific hypothesis, theory and law.
>
> We may have set a new record for the longest single thread on GP-UK
> (but I'm not sure)!
>
> We've also confirmed (I think) how incredibly difficult it is for us
> mere mortals to describe, let alone reach a consensus on, how we reach
> decisions about what is right or wrong.
Thankyou, that is a positive response that I can understand, though I
hope the thread record wasn't an objective. The pragmatic part of me
was looking at the proof or otherwise of god as an outcome and thinking
that no one was appearing to have moved (perhaps understandably)
position and therefore it was all hot air.
--
Tim Walter
www.yingtong.co.uk
|