seedload wrote: You just repeated what I said. Funny.
Some things are so unlikely that reasonable people don't bother to investigate them. When noone investigates them, there is no data.
Such people have been the bane of civilized progress since Ughugh the apeman said there was no way to handle that hot stuff that happens after lightling strikes, after all, no-one ever has, and that proves it!.
seedload wrote: Saying where's the data doesn't make those things any more likely or the people who can't be bothered to provide it to you any less reasonable.
Their opinion is theirs to flash. But when they say it is fact, I have EVERY right to demand, "where's the data". Their laziness does not entitle them to lie.
seedload wrote: And it most definitely doesn't change the logic that a series of such things is even more unlikely.
Unlikelyness is opinion, You can play with your opinion all you want (just beware of going blind
). All your playing however won't make your opinion FACT.
seedload wrote: In these cases the burden of proof/data rests elsewhere. That elsewhere is Rossi, and he feigns being willing to provide it, yet fails to do so when doing so would be easy, thereby adding another unlikely to a long list of multiplications.
IMHO, the burdan of proof lies on whoever purports to convey "FACT". If you make statements of FACT, it is up to you to support it or retract it, unless of course you also claim to be a big a con man as you SEEM to think Rossi is.
seedload wrote: Not recognizing the above, dismissing the simple logic, insulting reasonable people, arguing the language, and speculating on Rossis behalf is what is truly idiotic and sadly comical.
As I stated, you are intitled to your opinion, mistaken as it is.