Xref: utzoo talk.politics.misc:8476 sci.misc:1061
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill
From: bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.misc
Subject: Re: The Last Word on Friedman, Sevener, and Cuba
Message-ID: <1570@sigma.UUCP>
Date: 21 Mar 88 19:24:41 GMT
References: <3405@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <3895@whuts.UUCP> <3588@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <3904@whuts.UUCP> <3699@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <3925@whuts.UUCP>
Reply-To: bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan)
Organization: Summation Inc, Kirkland WA
Lines: 32

In article <3925@whuts.UUCP> orb@whuts.UUCP (45263-SEVENER,T.J.) writes:
>3)Even if John Carr were right to argue that the index of refraction
>  between an atmospheric density of 26.81 inches and 29.92 inches
>  is the same as that between 29.92 inches and 0 inches, he is
>  *still* wrong in contending that a refraction of 0.5 degrees would
>  make Cuba visible from Key West.
>  In fact, even with a refraction of 0.5 degrees the highest point
>  in Cuba of 344 feet is still 500 feet below the tangent line
>  of sight *with refraction*'s height of 844.8 feet.

Sevener never ceases to astound me.

John Carr *never* argued this point, and would be foolish to. It is entirely
and absolutely wrong, and is not really too far from the way Sevener tried
to smear Friedman by implying that Friedman claimed to represent the official
opinions of MIT (we never saw an apology for this, by the way, even though
one has been called for). 

This kind of tactic is fundamentally dishonest, even though it leaves Sevener
the "out" of saying that he never *said* that Carr argued this. It is a
deliberate attempt to make the opponent out to be a fool, or stupid, and is
the last resort of a dishonest debater who has found himself in the wrong.
No doubt, if this had not been responded to, we would have seen references
to it in later Sevener postings.

Also, as I pointed out in my preceding posting, Sevener's assumptions in 
this calculation of the necessary degree of refraction are incorrect.



-- 
William Swan  {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill